RADIO

<h1 class="print-title">=</h1><div>see also satellite radio</div><div>
</div><div>just added talk radio 11/16 as disambiguation?</div><div>
</div><div>=</div><div><div>=</div><div>
</div><div><a href="https://theintercept.com/2021/02/19/rip-rush-limbaugh/">https://theintercept.com/2021/02/19/rip-rush-limbaugh/</a></div><div>
</div><div><div data-reactid="217" style="box-sizing: border-box;">AFTER RUSH LIMBAUGH died on Wednesday, there was an outpouring of analysis of his impact on U.S. politics. He popularized a hard-right perspective on economics, celebrating the worthy wealthy and pouring scorn on the undeserving poor. Along the way, he amassed a personal fortune in the hundreds of millions of dollars.What’s gotten no attention, however, is the hilarious irony at the core of Limbaugh’s life: His career and wealth were a handout from the U.S. government.This is because Limbaugh was a radio broadcaster. The section of the electromagnetic spectrum used for radio is an extremely valuable resource, and different stations in the same area can’t broadcast at the same frequency. This means the federal government has to regulate radio, and grant monopolies in the form of licenses to broadcast at every point on the band. And until fairly recently, the government handed out these licenses — and thereby the opportunity to exploit the radio spectrum — at essentially no cost.this situation is equivalent to huge gold mines on public land. Imagine if the government simply gave the rights to extract the gold to corporations, and then the corporations hired a contractor to mine the gold, splitting the proceeds with them. The contractor would easily grow stupendously wealthy. But it would be a little hard to take if he constantly lectured everyone else about the nobility of the rich and the dangers of dependence on the government.</div><div data-reactid="228" style="box-sizing: border-box;">Yet this is exactly what Limbaugh did. No. 1 on a <a href="https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/second35undeniabletruthsoflife/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">Limbaugh list</a> of “undeniable truths”: “There is a distinct singular American culture — rugged individualism and self-reliance — which made America great.” No. 2 on the list: “The vast majority of the rich in this country did not inherit their wealth; they earned it. They are the country’s achievers, producers, and job creators.” Down at No. 27 is “Our cities have not been neglected, but poisoned with welfare dependency funds.”Limbaugh returned <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=site:rushlimbaugh.com+tax&client=safari&rls=en&ei=t5kvYO6SFYKF9PwPwPWt8Ak&start=10&sa=N&ved=2ahUKEwiuypea5fXuAhWCAp0JHcB6C54Q8NMDegQIBxBH&biw=1649&bih=1009" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">obsessively</a> to these themes for decades, turning them into common sense in the minds of his listeners. “There will always be poor people,” <a href="https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/americas-anchorman/35undeniabletruthsoflife/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">he said</a>, and “this is not the fault of the rich.” He <a href="https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2018/10/15/the-top-1409-individual-taxpayers-pay-more-than-the-bottom-70-of-america-combined/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">proclaimed constantly</a> that the super-wealthy are not under-taxed, but woefully <a href="https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2017/10/27/mick-mulvaney-explains-who-really-pays-taxes-and-why-every-tax-cut-can-be-called-a-tax-cut-for-the-rich/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">over-taxed</a>. (The misleading statistics he used are one of the right’s<a href="https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;"> favorite lies</a>.)For Limbaugh, all of this was a deeply felt issue of morality. “The rich, as you know, are under assault,” he <a href="https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/01/21/in_defense_of_the_working_rich/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">explained</a>. “They are maligned, criticized, ridiculed, impugned, and instead they ought to be held out and up as the role models.” <a href="https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/10/23/liberals_and_the_dependent_class/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">Meanwhile</a>, “There’s no question we have a dependent class in this country, and it’s growing. … These are people who have had their futures taken away from them.”Limbaugh’s own dependency on the federal government had its roots in the Communications Act of 1934. At the time, radio was a thrilling new invention, much like the internet in the 1990s. Idealists saw it as opening vast new possibilities for public education and edification, and tried to amend the act so it would reserve 25 percent of the spectrum for nonprofit organizations. Corporations had a different view, which was that they should be given the radio spectrum so they could commercialize it and make as much money as possible.The idealists lost when the Senate rejected their amendment. A previous 1927 bill had stated that each radio station “must be operated as if owned by the public. … It is as if people of a community should own a station and turn it over to the best man in sight with this injunction: ‘Manage this station in our interest.’” The 1934 Act downgraded this language to require that stations should operate for the “public interest, convenience and necessity.” What this meant was largely unspecified, and in any case would almost never be enforced.Instead, most of the radio spectrum was simply handed over to corporations, for fees so low that it might as well have been free. The broadcast industry then predictably consolidated, especially since it was largely impossible for companies to lose their licenses. Sixty years after the 1934 Act, the Federal Communications Commission did start auctioning off available radio spectrum, but there has always been exceedingly little to auction. All of Limbaugh’s main stations appear to have acquired their licenses decades before the auctions were established.This government dole made Limbaugh incredibly rich. In 2008, he <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/rush-limbaugh-net-worth" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">signed a contract</a> with Clear Channel Communications paying him $400 million over eight years. In 2018, <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/hayleycuccinello/2018/12/06/the-worlds-highest-paid-radio-hosts-of-2018/?sh=7d52e6bd2560" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">he made</a> $84.5 million. He lived in a Florida mansion <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/real-estate/the-50m-florida-house-rush-limbaugh-left-behind-for-his-wife" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">worth</a> $50 million and had a net worth at the end of his life <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/rush-limbaugh-net-worth" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none;">estimated</a> at $600 million.In fairness to Limbaugh, he did work his radio gold mines with skill and verve. In a fairer world, he could have accumulated perhaps 1 percent of his wealth. It is also the case that he is by no means unique. Other radio hosts, the stars and creators of hit broadcast TV shows, professional athletes, corporate media executives — all have grown extraordinarily rich, thanks to the government’s giveaway of the electromagnetic spectrum.But few have had the gall to gobble down so much public wealth while simultaneously berating the public about their failures and laziness. Hopefully in the future Limbaugh will be remembered not just for the stones he threw, but the fact that he threw them while living in the world’s biggest glass house.</div></div><div>=</div></div><div>=</div><div>an 1219 </div><div>...The core of the book involves political and psychological issues, but you start off with some history that’s really crucial to set the stage. Our current political media environment began in the late 1990s, you explain, but the pattern was set more than a generation earlier. So how is that pattern expressed in the late ‘50s and ‘60s? How did it first emerge?</div>
Once I started digging into this, I realized this really was the first chapter of the book, because there are things that we would consider to be the roots of, or the precursors to these dominant genres as we know them today. What was super helpful here on the right was the book by media historian Nicole Hammer, her book “Messengers on the Right” really traces this back through the 1950s.
She points to these radio show hosts that had these small followings, usually they were funded by sponsorships. They were almost like preachers — very fire-and-brimstone — talking about anti-desegregation movements, talking about how the United States needed to exit the United Nations. A lot of them were concerned about communists lurking inside the Supreme Court, or inside Washington and Congress. I’m talking about people like Clarence Manion and Dan Smoot. When you listen to these original broadcasts, they have a similar kind of clear, didactic, angry, imploring tone that is reminiscent of what we hear from our outrage hosts today.
These kinds of radio shows were really taking hold at the very same moment as our formative ironic satirists — those to whom we still refer today, and those to whom our top satirists today say, “They are the reason I got into this business” — when those individuals were engaging in their craft. We’re talking about the late 1950s into the 1960s, folks like Dick Gregory, Lenny Bruce and Mort Sahl who pioneered an entirely new spirit of social and cultural commentary that was quite radical, not even liberal but radical in its orientation. The fact that those two moments coincided was something that just seemed like — this can’t be just a coincidence, that this is how these two things are articulating themselves, and that they look so similar to what we witness today in our bifurcated cable landscape.
I was struck that the outrage on the right was specifically reacting to social changes they don’t like, they feel threatened by, while on the radical side these same changes are opening up and exposing contradictions in the status quo that they probe and engage with.They engage with them and start asking more questions about them. And the way that they’re exploring these issues is not to try to put these constructs back into boxes, but to really unpack them, and say, “Wait! Why do we even …” There’s a wonderful example I got from Ed Greenberg who’d been in The Committee and talked about the show The Cockettes, who were these sort of gender-fluid, cross-dressing men, and when he described it, he just described like just being mind-blown, thinking about “What is gender? Is gender a social construct?” To be thinking about that in the 60s like that, that is forward thinking — unpacking some of these things that we used to think of as fixed identities and exploring their truth value. That’s what I think satire is particularly gifted to do...<div>=</div><div>FAIL (nor not)</div><div>victim?! odd he quits paper but not radio? diff standards?onservative radio host Neal Larson quit writing his column for an Idaho newspaper after he made news for being called out by Neil deGrasse Tyson over a major factual error, <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/8/30/1565205/-Right-wing-talk-show-host-that-got-schooled-by-Neil-deGrasse-Tyson-is-not-going-to-write-anymore" target="blank" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">the Daily Kos reported.</a>“The instant it was picked up nationally, I was checkmated,” Larson wrote in <a href="http://magicvalley.com/news/opinion/columns/larson-a-newspaper-columnist-s-farewell/article_93296ba6-a649-5b10-8f2a-fd2b19c43b47.html" target="blank" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">his final column for the Twin Falls Times-News.</a> “I had no recourse, no comparable media platform at my disposal. It was as terrible and as helpless as you can imagine. Even more disappointing, a few people that I honestly thought were friends, shared online my unfortunate story with glee.”Larson ran afoul of the astrophysicist and Cosmos host last week <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/neil-degrasse-tyson-humiliates-right-wing-radio-host-accusing-him-of-insulting-9-year-old/" target="blank" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">when he accused deGrasse Tyson</a> of insulting a 9-year-old girl on Twitter.Unfortunately for Larson, his premise was based on a story <a href="http://www.clickhole.com/article/awesome-when-little-girl-told-neil-degrasse-tyson--3565" target="blank" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">in the satirical website Clickhole.</a> Even worse, deGrasse Tyson commented on the article and thoroughly debunked his column.“You abrogated your journalistic integrity by not verifying what you read in somebody else’s article, before using it as a foundational pillar in yours,” deGrasse Tyson wrote.Larson acknowledged the error in his final op-ed, adding that he apologized to deGrasse Tyson for his mistake. But he also complained about the amount of attention his failed attack received.“For those in the national spotlight, this is probably old hat, but I wasn’t equipped to handle the influx, logistically or emotionally,” Larson wrote. “If anyone had sent a kind word or more gentle and constructive criticism, I apologize because I probably missed it in the onslaught of hate.”However, Larson will continue broadcasting his radio show. Daily Kos pointed out that he has used it to argue, among other things, that Donald Trump is suited for the presidency because of his <a href="http://590kid.com/2016/07/21/larson-worst-fears-highest-hopes-donald-trump/" target="blank" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">“alpha-male”</a> personality, and that the choice of mascot for Washington D.C.’s NFL team <a href="http://590kid.com/2016/05/23/larson-unoffended-native-americans-devastate-liberals/" target="blank" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">is better</a> than “a screaming Black Lives Matter activist, or a finger-snapping drag queen.”<a href="http://www.alternet.org/right-wing/i-was-checkmated-conservative-columnist-quits-after-being-embarrassed-neil-degrasse-tyson">http://www.alternet.org/right-wing/i-was-checkmated-conservative-columnist-quits-after-being-embarrassed-neil-degrasse-tyson</a><a href="http://www.alternet.org/right-wing/neal-degrasse-tyson-burns-neal-larson">http://www.alternet.org/right-wing/neal-degrasse-tyson-burns-neal-larson</a>...Tyson proceeds to point out lies and flaws in Larson’s argument, including links to articles and interviews and videos—including pointing out that Larson’s assertion that Tyson had attacked some young girl is a bald-faced lie. <blockquote style="line-height: 25px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">So you abrogated your journalistic integrity by not verifying what you read in somebody else's article, before using it as a foundational pillar in yours.</blockquote>Larson’s gonna need a strong drink to wash down that hot-air balloon he calls his ego.Here's the rest of Tyson’s response:<blockquote style="line-height: 25px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">2) I am agnostic, and actively disavow the atheist label:[Audio: 6m30s]: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnHY1cC9a4A" target="blank" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">www.youtube.com/...</a>[Video: 3m 48s] <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzSMC5rWvos" target="blank" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">www.youtube.com/...</a>3) People who deny human-induced climate change are badly misinformed. This position is neither politically liberal nor conservative. It's factual. Although one could argue that all those who want to preserve the environment are the real conservatives in this discussion.4) You use "liberal" as a tag to characterize my politics. Since I have no active public political position, that's a hard task to accomplish. Climate change deniers are misinformed. But so are people who think vaccines give you autism. And so are people who think genetically modified foods are bad for you. These science-denying postures cross political boundaries, as I clumsily attempted to convey recently on Bill Maher.<a href="http://www.mediaite.com/tv/neil-degrasse-tyson-criticizes-liberals-for-anti-science-beliefs-on-maher/" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">http://www.mediaite.com/tv/neil-degrasse-tyson-criticizes-liberals-for-a...</a>5) The "incident" with a 9yr old girl never happened. It looks to be a hoax. No such tweets ever existed on November 29th, 2015, or on any other day. My only tweet on November 29, 2015 (as ...</blockquote></div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>=</div><div>http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/radio-host-who-called-enslaving-immigrants-has-hosted-gop-presidentialAccording to a Media Matters analysis of Mickelson's show, in 2015 alone he has hosted most of <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2016/presidential-candidate-watchlist" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">the </a>Republican presidential field. Jeb Bush, Donald Trump, Rick Perry, Jim Gilmore, Chris Christie, George Pataki, and John Kasich have not appeared on his program this year.According to a <a href="https://twitter.com/amtalker/status/634072768926105600" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">tweet</a> by Mickelson, he said he hosted Trump "a few months ago," but it appears that was in <a href="http://mickelson.libsyn.com/tuesday-october-14-2014" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">October 2014</a> and outside the scope of this analysis. One of Carson's appearances was during an episode featuring a guest host.Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) appeared on the program on August 21 amid widespread outrage over Mickelson's immigration proposal, but the controversial plan was not discussed.Mickelson told Media Matters earlier this week about how candidates end up on his show: "They'll come, they'll pursue it and say 'can we come on,' and 'sure,' I don't chase them around looking for them to come on, they usually call and ask me."Although these recent inflammatory comments have garnered significant attention -- due in part to Mickelson's <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/features/2015-02-23/some-radio-hosts-you-ve-never-heard-of-are-among-the-most-powerful-people-in-the-republican-party" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">kingmaker status</a> in the state -- Mickelson has a long history of making offensive comments about immigrants. Earlier this year, Mickelson said he <a href="http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/06/04/ia-radio-host-mickelson-i-assume-youre-not-here/203879" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">assumed</a> anyone with a Hispanic last name who gets in trouble with police is "not here legally" and <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/02/20/ia-radio-host-claims-equal-education-for-childr/202603" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">called</a> educating undocumented children at public schools "a scam." Mickelson has also suggested bringing back <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/06/08/ia-gop-kingmaker-mickelson-wants-to-bring-back/203912" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">Jim Crow-era voting laws</a> such as something similar to a literacy test.Mickelson has promoted his anti-immigration theories during interviews with candidates, including <a href="http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/03/ted-cruz-questions-supreme-court-ruling-ordering-free-education-for-immigrant-kids.html/" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">pushing</a> Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) to embrace the argument that undocumented children shouldn't be allowed to attend public schools and<a href="http://traffic.libsyn.com/mickelson/mickelson-2015-04-24.mp3" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;"> asking </a>Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Marco Rubio (R-FL) if they believed a <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_04/fasttrack_as_a_leftist_conspir055228.php" style="color: rgb(241, 96, 44); text-decoration: none;">debunked</a> Dick Morris conspiracy theory about the Trans Pacific Partnership including a provision for unrestricted immigration to the United States.</div><div></div><div>The BBC is not the first outlet that has tried to weed out climate change deniers.  In 2012, the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/10/18/climate-sceptic-aussie-radio-host-must-take-fact-checking-course-says-authority" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; color: rgb(51, 153, 204); text-decoration: none;">government of Australia forced conservative radio host Alan Jones</a> to take a fact-checking seminar after he repeatedly told his listeners that climate change was a farce, and that there was no sound science on the subject.American media outlets, on the other hand, not only tolerate anti-science viewpoints, but embrace them.  A <a href="http://ringoffireradio.com/2014/07/bbc-to-journalists-stop-giving-quacks-airtime/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; color: rgb(51, 153, 204); text-decoration: none;">recent report by the Union of Concerned Scientists</a> showed that cable news giants CNN and Fox News reported incorrect information about climate change in 33% and 72% of their coverage of the issue, respectively.</div><div>==</div>

part of Conservative Entertainment Complex
==bs islam rant: <a href="http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2012/09/26/radio-jocks-suspended-for-defending-free-speech/">http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2012/09/26/radio-jocks-suspended-for-defending-free-speech/</a>Armstrong & Getty is a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morning_drive" title="Morning drive" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">morning drive</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_show" title="Radio show" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">radio show</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_show" title="Television show" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">television show</a> airing in California and Hawaii on several <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_Channel" title="Clear Channel" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Clear Channel</a> radio stations. The call-in format <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk_radio" title="Talk radio" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">talk show</a> is a mixture of political commentary, observations on local, national, and international <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News" title="News" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">news</a> as well as reflections on social issues presented with humor.<div id="toc" class="toc" style="border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 7px; display: table; zoom: 1; color: rgb(37, 37, 37); background-color: rgb(249, 249, 249);"><div id="toctitle" style="direction: ltr; text-align: center;"><h2 style="color: black; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border: none; display: inline; line-height: 1.3; background: none;">Contents</h2>  [<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#" id="togglelink" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">hide</a>] </div><ul style="list-style-type: none; margin: 0.3em 0px; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#The_show" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">1 The show</a><ul style="list-style-type: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 2em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-2" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#Doug_Stephan_incident" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">1.1 Doug Stephan incident</a></li></ul></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-3" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#Notable_facts" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">2 Notable facts</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-4" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#Comments_regarding_Sacramento" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">3 Comments regarding Sacramento</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-5" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#External_links" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">4 External links</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-6" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#References" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">5 References</a></li></ul></div><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); line-height: 1.3; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">The show[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Armstrong%26_Getty&action=edit&section=1" title="Edit section: The show" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">edit</a>]</h2>Armstrong & Getty airs live on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KSTE" title="KSTE" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">KSTE</a> in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacramento" title="Sacramento" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">Sacramento</a>, CA. The show won Best of Sacramento twenty four years in a row.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#cite_note-1" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[1]</a><h3 style="margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom-style: none; line-height: 1.6; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Doug Stephan incident<span class="mw-editsection" style="-webkit-user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; display: inline-block; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: -webkit-isolate;">[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Armstrong%26_Getty&action=edit&section=2" title="Edit section: Doug Stephan incident" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">edit</a>]</h3>On July 28, 2010, Armstrong and Getty were tipped off by a listener that a fellow radio talk show host, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Stephan" title="Doug Stephan" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">Doug Stephan</a>, had been stealing audio material from the Armstrong and Getty show, editing the audio, and using it in his show in an attempt to portray it as if he were speaking to their caller.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#cite_note-2" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[2]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#cite_note-3" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[3]</a>During that same broadcast, the hosts were able to speak to Douglas Stephan, himself, regarding the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism" title="Plagiarism" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">plagiarism</a> that appeared evident upon comparison of the duo's show content and Douglas Stephan's "callers" some days later. Stephen never admitted to the allegations, but apologized, saying that the calls were misplaced and accidentally played on his Good Day show.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#cite_note-4" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[4]</a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); line-height: 1.3; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Notable facts[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Armstrong%26_Getty&action=edit&section=3" title="Edit section: Notable facts" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">edit</a>]</h2>In September 2008, both Armstrong and Getty were named to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacramento_Magazine" title="Sacramento Magazine" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">Sacramento Magazine</a>'s 100 Most Powerful and Influential list.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#cite_note-5" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[5]</a>The duo <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emcee" title="Emcee" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">emcees</a> for various events in Northern California, participating in The Great Debate to "Get Out the 2006 Vote",<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#cite_note-6" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[6]</a> and opening for a few of political commentator <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Savage(commentator)" title="Michael Savage (commentator)" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Michael Savage</a>'s live shows.<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); line-height: 1.3; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Comments regarding Sacramento[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Armstrong%26_Getty&action=edit&section=4" title="Edit section: Comments regarding Sacramento" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">edit</a>]</h2>In August, 2000, on their daytime show Armstrong and Getty discussed a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_magazine" title="Time magazine" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Time magazine</a> article on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiculturalism" title="Multiculturalism" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">diversity</a>.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#cite_note-newsreview.com-7" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[7]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#cite_note-8" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[8]</a> At the time, the Mayor <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heather_Fargo" title="Heather Fargo" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Heather Fargo</a> of Sacramento was allegedly "mad to hear the show denigrating that distinction (regarding Time's honoring Sacramento)" and attempted to rally support in opposition of the comments.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong%26_Getty#cite_note-newsreview.com-7" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[7]</a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); line-height: 1.3; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">External links[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Armstrong%26_Getty&action=edit&section=5" title="Edit section: External links" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(11, 0, 128); background: none;">edit</a>]</h2><ul style="margin: 0.3em 0px 0px 1.6em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: url(data:image/svg+xml,%3C%3Fxml%20version%3D%221.0%22%20encoding%3D%22UTF-8%22%3F%3E%0A%3Csvg%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%20version%3D%221.1%22%20width%3D%225%22%20height%3D%2213%22%3E%0A%3Ccircle%20cx%3D%222.5%22%20cy%3D%229.5%22%20r%3D%222.5%22%20fill%3D%22%2300528c%22%2F%3E%0A%3C%2Fsvg%3E%0A); color: rgb(37, 37, 37); line-height: 22.3999996185303px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://armstrongandgetty.talk650kste.com/" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(102, 51, 102); padding-right: 13px; background: linear-gradient(transparent, transparent) 100% 50% no-repeat, url(data:image/svg+xml,%3C%3Fxml%20version%3D%221.0%22%20encoding%3D%22UTF-8%22%3F%3E%3Csvg%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%20width%3D%2210%22%20height%3D%2210%22%3E%3Cg%20transform%3D%22translate%28-826.429%20-698.791%29%22%3E%3Crect%20width%3D%225.982%22%20height%3D%225.982%22%20x%3D%22826.929%22%20y%3D%22702.309%22%20fill%3D%22%23fff%22%20stroke%3D%22%2306c%22%2F%3E%3Cg%3E%3Cpath%20d%3D%22M831.194%20698.791h5.234v5.391l-1.571%201.545-1.31-1.31-2.725%202.725-2.689-2.689%202.808-2.808-1.311-1.311z%22%20fill%3D%22%2306f%22%2F%3E%3Cpath%20d%3D%22M835.424%20699.795l.022%204.885-1.817-1.817-2.881%202.881-1.228-1.228%202.881-2.881-1.851-1.851z%22%20fill%3D%22%23fff%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fsvg%3E) 100% 50%;">Armstrong & Getty at Talk 650 KSTE</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.910knew.com/pages/armstronggetty.html" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(102, 51, 102); padding-right: 13px; background: linear-gradient(transparent, transparent) 100% 50% no-repeat, url(data:image/svg+xml,%3C%3Fxml%20version%3D%221.0%22%20encoding%3D%22UTF-8%22%3F%3E%3Csvg%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%20width%3D%2210%22%20height%3D%2210%22%3E%3Cg%20transform%3D%22translate%28-826.429%20-698.791%29%22%3E%3Crect%20width%3D%225.982%22%20height%3D%225.982%22%20x%3D%22826.929%22%20y%3D%22702.309%22%20fill%3D%22%23fff%22%20stroke%3D%22%2306c%22%2F%3E%3Cg%3E%3Cpath%20d%3D%22M831.194%20698.791h5.234v5.391l-1.571%201.545-1.31-1.31-2.725%202.725-2.689-2.689%202.808-2.808-1.311-1.311z%22%20fill%3D%22%2306f%22%2F%3E%3Cpath%20d%3D%22M835.424%20699.795l.022%204.885-1.817-1.817-2.881%202.881-1.228-1.228%202.881-2.881-1.851-1.851z%22%20fill%3D%22%23fff%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fsvg%3E) 100% 50%;">Armstrong & Getty at Talk 910 KNEW</a></li></ul>

----Media consultant Holland Cooke highlighted the deceptive advocacy of right-wing talk radio hosts on behalf of sponsors such as tea party groups, arguing that listeners "might not understand that free speech had a price tag."In a piece <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/tea-party-radio-network-105774_Page2.html" style="outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">titled</a> "The tea party radio network," Politico highlighted the relationship between conservative talk radio shows and tea party non-profit groups who often act as sponsors of the shows. The report "found that conservative groups spent nearly $22 million to broker and pay for involved advertising relationships known as sponsorships with a handful of influential talkers including Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh between the first talk radio deals in 2008 and the end of 2012." On the April 17 segment on MSNBC's The Ed Show, Ed Schultz hosted talk radio consultant Holland Cooke and Ken Vogel, a co-author of the Politico piece. Vogel pointed out that the nature of right-wing radio's sponsorship "begs the question 'where does the line between the core ideological beliefs of the host end and where does the paid sponsorship start?'" Cooke pointed out that the conservative radio advertising landscape had shifted after Rush Limbaugh's <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/11/27/right-wing-media-launch-attacks-after-sandra-fl/191536" style="outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">notorious attacks</a> on Sandra Fluke caused an advertiser boycott, due in large part to groups like <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/flushrush/" style="outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">Flush Rush</a>, and explained that sponsors are often "treated like a news source," leaving many listeners not realizing that they are even listening to ads:http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/04/17/media-expert-highlights-problematic-tea-party-t/198934hayes doc showed fla rep miller interview on laptop=<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name">

<a href="http://www.mediaactioncenter.net/2013/05/charlie-sykes-and-rush-limbaugh-same-as.html">Charlie Sykes (and Rush Limbaugh) the same as Walter Cronkite? Just Say No!</a>

</h3>

</div>

FOR

IMMEDIATE RELEASE</div>

Friday,

May 24, 2013</div>

Contact

Sue Wilson  <a href="mailto:sue@mediaactioncenter.net" moz-do-not-send="true">sue@mediaactioncenter.net</a>   </div>

</div>

</div>

Media watchdog charges that Wisconsin radio station legal claim to

FCC that talk radio is 'bonafide news' could lead listener

confusion</div>

</div>

MILWAUKEE

– Talk radio is not news – neither Charlie Sykes nor Rush Limbaugh is Walter Cronkite – argues a media watchdog after a talk radio station argued

recently to the Federal Communications Commission that its local political talk

radio shows are the same as "bonafide news."</div>

</div>

Attorneys

for Journal Communications' WTMJ-AM radio made that legal argument to the FCC

in answer to a petition to deny the station's broadcast license for violations

of the FCC's quasi-equal opportunity rule, or "Zapple Doctrine," said

Sue Wilson of Media Action Center.</div>

</div>

Media

Action Center filed a petition late in 2012 with the FCC to deny the license

because, during the Scott Walker recall campaign, WTMJ's Jeff Wagner and

Charlie Sykes shows were proven to have given as much as a half a

million dollars in free airtime to supporters of Republican Governor Scott

Walker. The station specifically denied comparable time to supporters of his

Democratic opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.  </div>

</div>

 The

FCC's quasi-equal opportunities rule (Zapple Doctrine) states that broadcasters

must give supporters of both major party candidates comparable

airtime.   Only "bonafide news" programs are exempt so they

can cover candidates' events in real time.  </div>

</div>

 "Bonafide

news programs are specifically not allowed to politic for candidates,"

says Media Action Center Director Sue Wilson.  "Now is our one chance

to make a stand for journalism. The FCC has a duty to the public to draw a clear

line between news and opinion. </div>

</div>

"If

the FCC does not draw a clear line, radio talkers from Charlie Sykes to Rush Limbaugh will be equated with newsmen like Walter

Cronkite, and listeners will lose any hope of ferreting out fact from

fiction," Wilson added.</div>

</div>

Media

Action Center has launched a petition for public support, "Tell the

FCC:  Talk Radio is NOT Bonafide News!"  Find it at  <a href="http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/tell-the-fcc-talk-radio" moz-do-not-send="true">http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/tell-the-fcc-talk-radio</a>

.</div>

<h1 style=" margin-top: 0; padding-top: 0;">The Lunatic World Of Gun Rights Radio</h1>

<h5><a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog"> Blog </a>››› May 29, 2013 1:24 PM EDT  ››› BEN DIMIERO & MATT GERTZ</h5>

</div>

<h2>How Gun Activists Team Up With Fringe Conspiracy Theorists</h2>

As the debate over gun legislation has raged in recent months, prominent gun activists have been appearing on the radio and TV shows of fringe conspiracy theorists to push their message.

The hosts of these shows believe in a range of absurd conspiracies, including that the U.S. government perpetrated the 9-11 attacks; that the recent mass shootings in Newton and Aurora were somehow staged; and that impoverished black men are gearing up to kill "white heterosexual Christians."

Despite regularly uniting with fringe conspiracy theorists -- and often joining them in espousing outlandish conspiracies -- Gun Owners of America executive director Larry Pratt, longtime National Rifle Association board member Ted Nugent, and former NRA president David Keene represent organizations that still wield considerable influence in the debate over gun legislation.

The NRA says that it has millions of members and annual revenues in excess of $200 million, and their annual meetings regularly draw leading Republican presidential candidates. Pratt's group Gun Owners of America has also become an important player in the gun debate; an April article by The New York Times <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/04/04/ny-times-hides-extremism-of-fringe-gun-lobby-gr/193468">highlighted</a> how GOA was "emerging as an influential force" over then-pending Senate gun legislation, while ignoring Pratt's own record of extremism.

In recent weeks, extremist radio host Pete Santilli has made <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/21/pete-santilli-secret-service_n_3312564.html">headlines</a> for <a href="http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/radio-host-frequented-gun-activists-calls-shooting-bush-family-obama-sexual-violence-against">violent </a>comments he made about Hillary Clinton, President Obama, and the Bush family. (Santilli's inflammatory comments <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05/20/santilli-doubles-down-on-clinton-attack-i-want/194158">include</a> saying the he wants to shoot Clinton "in the vagina and let her suffer right before my eyes" over her supposed "treason.")

While it's tempting to dismiss Santilli as just another crackpot with a microphone and an Internet connection, his show has been validated by appearances from major gun activists like Pratt and Nugent.

Nugent and Pratt's appearances on Santilli's show are not an aberration; they're symptomatic of how prominent gun activists have teamed up with fringe conspiracy theorists to oppose gun legislation and spin fantastical theories about the government disarming (or going to war with) American citizens.

Working with these fringe hosts may be a deliberate strategy; during an appearance with infamous conspiracy theorist Alex Jones last year, Pratt praised Jones for helping increase GOA's exposure, saying "thank you for having me on, because we have a much bigger voice because of you, my friend." (During that same interview, Pratt suggested the government may have been behind the mass shooting in Aurora.)

In this report, we look at gun activists' appearances with:

<ul>

<li><a href="http://mediamatters.org/print/blog/2013/05/29/the-lunatic-world-of-gun-rights-radio/194254#solomon">Stan Solomon</a></li>

<li><a href="http://mediamatters.org/print/blog/2013/05/29/the-lunatic-world-of-gun-rights-radio/194254#jones">Alex Jones</a></li>

<li><a href="http://mediamatters.org/print/blog/2013/05/29/the-lunatic-world-of-gun-rights-radio/194254#santilli">Pete Santilli</a></li>

<li><a href="http://mediamatters.org/print/blog/2013/05/29/the-lunatic-world-of-gun-rights-radio/194254#beck">Glenn Beck</a></li>

<li><a href="http://mediamatters.org/print/blog/2013/05/29/the-lunatic-world-of-gun-rights-radio/194254#franchi">Gary Franchi</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

===

<div class="byline media-culture">Thomhartmann.com / By <a href="http://www.alternet.org/authors/thom-hartmann">Thom Hartmann</a> [1]</div>

<h1 class="node-title">The Right Wing Cult Machine Exposed</h1>

</div>

<div class="story-date">April 26, 2013  |  </div>

Far right Conservatism has become a cult, and Rush Limbaugh is its leader.

By definition, a cult is a group or sect bound together by adoration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

A cult promises you redemption. It tells you that if you do what it says, and as it believes, you will be protected from the evil people that are out to get you and the rest of society.

A cult purges the non-believers. And it actively tries to vilify all those who are not part of the cult, saying that they're doomed and destined to go to hell.

So how did Limbaugh become the leader of such a large, and influential, cult?

Like with any cult, the power that Limbaugh has over his flock as grown over time.

Right wing radio started out in conflict with mainstream society, and outside of mainstream politics.

What was once a little cult guided by Limbaugh has transformed into a massive cult that today has enveloped much of the Conservative movement.

So how did this transformation occur?

Well, like cult leaders do, Limbaugh offered up a theatrical flair, and accompanied that with a marketing genius.

He offered his followers redemption. He offered them protection from what he told them they should fear – liberals and feminists. He demanded ideological purity, and absolute devotion to the ideology of far-right "conservative" corporatism. And he vilified all those who didn't see things his way.

Limbaugh then managed to convince his followers that faith in his word was more important than facts. No matter what everyone else said, if Rush said it, it must be true. Only information that supports Limbaugh's positions can be believed, and everything else is just lies.

Since his first successes, he's been followed by a succession of other right-wing cult leaders, from Glenn Beck to Mark Levin to Alex Jones.

Which brings us to today.

Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the right-wing talk radio cult have conjured up such a large following that they're helping the Koch Brothers drive the polarization within the Republican Party, and within America's political discourse.

Ironically, so says Frank Luntz, a top Republican consultant and campaign guru.

Earlier this week, Luntz told a group of college students at the University of Pennsylvania that Limbaugh and his fellow right-wing talk-radio cult leaders are "problematic" for the Republican Party because they're responsible for the stark polarization within the party.

In a secret recording of his comments, Luntz can be heard saying that, "And they get great ratings, and they drive the message, and it's really problematic. And this is not on the Democratic side. It's only on the Republican side...[inaudible]. [Democrats have] got every other source of news on their side. And so that is a lot of what's driving it. If you take—Marco Rubio's getting his ass kicked. Who's my Rubio fan here? We talked about it. He's getting destroyed! By Mark Levin, by Rush Limbaugh, and a few others. He's trying to find a legitimate, long-term effective solution to immigration that isn't the traditional Republican approach, and talk radio is killing him. That's what's causing this thing underneath. And too many politicians in Washington are playing coy."

Basically, Luntz was saying that the right-wing media and its cult following are not serving the national political debate and not helping the Republican Party widen its appeal beyond its declining base of aging boomer cultists.

But no matter what Luntz says, Limbaugh and the rest of his right-wing media pals will continue to rally their followers, and continue to vilify those who dare think otherwise.

They will continue to paint President Obama as America's anti-hero, using terms like "socialist" and "Muslim" to further scare their cult followers into seeing things their way.

The good news is that there are still some semblances of a normal, and non-cult media in America.

Unlike the right-wing media, real media – and even progressive media – is not cult-like. It talks about ideas that are widely accepted (social safety net, clean environment, nondiscrimination, a solid middle class), and that are not in conflict with the rest of society.

It's not based on fear or faith. It's based on facts. And it respects other beliefs and ideas, instead of vilifying them.

And perhaps, most importantly, real media doesn't fear or hate our government, and certainly doesn't suggest we should be armed and ready to attack our own government.

Sadly, that cult is coming dangerously close to having complete control over the Republican Party and much of the political discourse in our country.

Thankfully, people are waking up and recognizing the far right-wing media for what it is: a cult.

</div>

Is  Rush Limbaugh and his tribe of verbal arsonists inciting unstable people to murder?  I think the answer is a resounding yes!  What does Richard Popolowski, Stephen Von Brunn and Scott P. Roeder, the murderer of Dr. Tiller have in common? They were all motivated by the concerns that are the subject of over the top harangues by Right Wing radio hysterics 24/7. Popolowski ambushed and murdered three cops in Pittsburg with a military assault rifle as they answered a routine domestic disturbance call placed by his mother!  Subsequent investigations have revealed that Poppi thought President Obama was going to take his guns and oppress white men.  This is the kind of crazy inflammatory crap that Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh spout ad-nauseum.

James W. Von Brunn, who murdered a black guard, Stephen Tyrone John’s, in  the Washington Holocaust museum is a long time racist/anti-Semitic anti-government fanatic, And Dr. Tiller, a gynecologist who performs abortions, was targeted by right-wing broadcasters, especially Bill O’Reilly, who routinely called him “Tiller The Baby killer” and even gave out the address of his clinic on the air.  Now we discover a murdered census taker in Kentucky, Bill Sparkman, who from all appearances was lynched, and has the word FED, for federal worker, inscribed on his chest! I believe  Sparkman’s murder was directly inspired by Glenn Beck’s incendiary attacks on the US Census!

<h1 class="print-title"><a href="http://commentariesonthetimes.wordpress.com/tag/glenn-beck-incites-murder/">http://commentariesonthetimes.wordpress.com/tag/glenn-beck-incites-murder/</a></h1>

<h1 class="print-title">Charlie Sykes Defends Sampling of Atrocious Video, A Fave of Neo-Nazis</h1>

<div class="meta" style=" width: 1136px;">by <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/users/35270/mary-bottari" title="View user profile.">Mary Bottari</a> [1] — April 9, 2013 - 11:52am</div>

<ul>

<li class="vocabulary-2">Topics: <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/topics/economy">Economy</a> [2]</li>

</ul>

</div>

<a class="da2a_button" href="http://www.addtoany.com/share_save?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.prwatch.org%2Fnews%2F2013%2F04%2F12051%2Fcharlie-sykes-defends-sampling-atrocious-video-fave-neo-nazis&linkname=Charlie%20Sykes%20Defends%20Sampling%20of%20Atrocious%20Video%2C%20A%20Fave%20of%20Neo-Nazis" id="da2a_1"><img src="/a295c00f-49ee-5606-b038-a46232edc960.png"/> Share this</a> [3]

Charlie SykesJournal Communication’s right-wing talker Charlie Sykes (WTMJ Radio 620), delights in stirring controversy. But last week he went too far. In a segment discussing whether food stamp recipients should be allowed to buy unhealthy food, Sykes played a clip of an incredibly offensive video that is a favorite of neo-Nazi websites.

Dwelling on a popular Sykes topic the “growing gigantic culture of dependent people” or “moocher culture,” Sykes slips in a <a href="http://www.620wtmj.com/podcasts/talk/charliesykes/201481111.html">long clip (at 29.20)</a> [4] where the voice of an African American woman can be heard listing all the fast food joints -- even liquor stores -- where one can allegedly use an electronic benefits (EBT) card. Sykes did not explain the clip or where it originated. The full song portrays women as having kids in order to receive food stamps to fund a party lifestyle. (For the record, you can't buy booze with food stamps.)

The clip is part of a video "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzspsovNvII">It’s Free, Swipe Yo EBT</a> [5]" made by a young woman named LaToya “Chapter” Hicks, but the production credits go to Christopher Jackson. He is reportedly the same Christopher Jackson who wrote an incredibly offensive piece about teaching black children, another fave of the “we heart Hitler” crowd. The Jackson essay is featured on the white nationalist site <a href="http://whitereference.blogspot.com/2009/07/blackboard-jungle-2009-christopher.html" target="blank">WhiteReference.org</a> [6] and Chapter’s video on the Nazi site <a href="http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t835733/" target="blank">Stormfront.org</a> [7].

The Wisconsin Democratic Party promptly put out a release denouncing the clip as racist and offensive. The party contacted reporters at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and also wrote to the broadcast side of the Journal Communications firm (which owns the paper and the radio station) asking VP Steve Wexler to look into it. While the newspaper recently put the inopportune Tweets by the Democratic Party spokesman on the front page of its paper prompting disciplinary action, it could not be bothered to write a word about the controversy over the weekend.   Sykes defended the use of the video in a blog post <a href="http://www.rightwisconsin.com/perspectives/201856521.html?lc=Smart" target="_blank">Sunday night on "Right Wisconsin</a> [8]."

“Pshaw,” says Sykes -- she’s black, it's art, just because neo-Nazis love it doesn’t mean it's a problem. In fact, Sykes so loves the video “about welfare programs run amok” that he says he uses it all the time and has previously posted it as an "anthem" for his nation of moochers theme. The Journal Sentinel covered the issue briefly <a href="http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/201988301.html" target="_blank">online</a> [9] Monday, but only because Sykes wrote about it.

Sykes might think that he and Stormfront have a uniquely discerning eye for art, but by any measure the video is highly offensive. It shouldn’t be used by any news source and Journal Communications should make it clear to Mr. Moocher that he shouldn’t be using it either.

Journal Communications has given Sykes a lot of rope lately. He is the center of their new experiment called "<a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/10/09/is-wisconsins-journal-broadcasting-grooming-the/190479%20http://www.rightwisconsin.com/" target="blank">Right Wisconsin</a> [10]" a subscriber-based, paid content news site for right-wingers which Sykes touted in January as a means of <a href="http://www.620wtmj.com/blogs/charliesykes/187731381.html" target="blank">helping to get more Republicans elected</a> [11]. One of the sponsors and "partners" is the phony issue-ad group <a href="http://wicfg.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/wisconsin-club-for-growth-right-wisconsin/" target="_blank">Wisconsin Club for Growth</a> [12], which has spent millions in the state defending Governor Scott Walker and GOP candidates. The site features long-time GOP operatives like Brian Fraley, now at the MacIver Institute, and “reporting” by Media Trackers, a Breitbart-style attack dog operation. Both the MacIver Institute and Media Trackers are funded by the Bradley Foundation.

This type of news site is not unusual, what is unusual is that it is sponsored by a mainstream media outfit like Journal Communications which is supposed to be keeping an eye on its staff and is not supposed to be helping one political party advantage another.

</div>

<div class="print-footer">Center for Media and Democracy • 520 University Avenue, Suite 260 • Madison, Wisconsin 53703

Phone: 608-260-9713 • Fax: 608-260-9714</div>

<div class="print-source_url">Source URL: <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/04/12051/charlie-sykes-defends-sampling-atrocious-video-fave-neo-nazis">http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/04/12051/charlie-sykes-defends-sampling-atrocious-video-fave-neo-nazis</a></div>

Links:

[1] http://www.prwatch.org/users/35270/mary-bottari

[2] http://www.prwatch.org/topics/economy

[3] http://www.addtoany.com/share_save?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.prwatch.org%2Fnews%2F2013%2F04%2F12051%2Fcharlie-sykes-defends-sampling-atrocious-video-fave-neo-nazis&linkname=Charlie%20Sykes%20Defends%20Sampling%20of%20Atrocious%20Video%2C%20A%20Fave%20of%20Neo-Nazis

[4] http://www.620wtmj.com/podcasts/talk/charliesykes/201481111.html

[5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzspsovNvII

[6] http://whitereference.blogspot.com/2009/07/blackboard-jungle-2009-christopher.html

[7] http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t835733/

[8] http://www.rightwisconsin.com/perspectives/201856521.html?lc=Smart

[9] http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/201988301.html

[10] http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/10/09/is-wisconsins-journal-broadcasting-grooming-the/190479 http://www.rightwisconsin.com/

[11] http://www.620wtmj.com/blogs/charliesykes/187731381.html

[12] http://wicfg.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/wisconsin-club-for-growth-right-wisconsin/

===

<a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/03/01/rush-limbaugh-still-toxic-for-advertisers-one-y/192865">http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/03/01/rush-limbaugh-still-toxic-for-advertisers-one-y/192865</a>

Limbaugh tipping pt?

��

<a href="http://">http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/10/rush-limbaugh-scandal-proves-contagious-for-talk-radio-advertisers.html</a>

=

��

from tyfnpa2

RADIO

In early 1960's, FCC? perhaps wanting to offset crass commericialism of airwaves, encouraged religious programming.  This allowed Manion to have considerable influence (fundraiser for Goldwater etc).

ec: 1990 talk 2nd to music, but talk news 1 by 1994; AM mostly urban, and FM became beter signal for music, so AM scrambling. in 80's satellite made nat'l syndication possible; 1985 fainess doc (start 1949) gone. appeal ct agreed in 1989; congress tried to put it back in Comm Act, RR vetoed. 45

WSJ identified Rush Limbaugh as the first to capitalize of the elimination of the FD. rush by mid 90's 20 mil on 660 stations 113 and was widely credited with GOP wins in 1994 (made an honorary member of the House) and 2000 (both of which have had significate impacts on climate change legislation (as noted ----).  In fact, after the 2008 GOP debacle, Limbaugh was seriously considered for leadership of the GOP/rnc?.  Limbaugh ridiculed the idea of global warming.

The right in a sort of back-handed way admits to the bias in its media, but poses it as a counterweight to the "liberal media" (or cultural elite) though as K Hall Jameson and _ point out in Echo Chamber meta-analysis found no bias in newspapers and negligible in news magazines and tv news p xi. However, they can account for the perception because of the hostile media phenomenon, which allows us to discard any information we disagree with (xi).  When the conservative media is identified as being biased, they simply produce what they perceive of as counter-examples, which the audience can even store up for later use (xi).  Perhaps as an aspect of the mirrioring strategy, charges tend to get reversed and exaggerated: if Arnold Schwartenegger is a groper of women, Gray Davis is a batterer (145). Moreover, if the mainstream press ignores a story of interest to conservatives, it is seen as further proof of the former's bias (145 plus).

The authors say there is no support for the strong charge that conservative talk radio being irrationally emotional (or at least that that's harmful), though they identify Limbaugh as using extreme hypotheticals, ridicule (more so in the subscriber only content, perhaps for reasons similar to direct mail), ad hominem in ordr to associate targets with negative emotions, which make others charges easier to believe, and rightwing hosts often take extreme positions that make more mainstream figures seem sensible by comparison (EC 15).  Morever, Limbaugh has an important role in bootstrapping information from the fringe to the mainstream; he gets information from blogs, which are then picked up by Fox and finally the mainstream press (EC 4).  he also can acts as a translator for the more technical content on WSJ, as well as amplifying its emotional "voltage" (EC 76-7?), which could be a positve to the degree that it encourages political participation.  In sum, rightwing radio acts as an information insulator (22% of Americans get their news ther, and while at one time it would b supplemented by a variety of other sources, now the defaults are to Fox News and WSJ (both owned by Murdoch). All three support the orhers when attacked. (  ) The moral outrage directed at opponents makes them enemies, erroding common ground.  Limbaugh's audience tend toward older, christian white males [see themselves increasingly as victims?]

��

CSE produced radio ads anti GW ( McCright 357

----

cpb head  fired witchunt tomlinson

2005  <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democracynow.org%2F2005%2F7%2F12%2Fcpb_chief_tomlinson_comes_under_fire&rct=j&q=cpb%20head%20%20fired%20witchunt%20tomlinson&ei=S9E9TZO-Lo32swPY7tzpAw&usg=AFQjCNH_V-kOW6s3jTfnvaBuw_a-XPUEBQ&cad=rja">http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democracynow.org%2F2005%2F7%2F12%2Fcpb_chief_tomlinson_comes_under_fire&rct=j&q=cpb%20head%20%20fired%20witchunt%20tomlinson&ei=S9E9TZO-Lo32swPY7tzpAw&usg=AFQjCNH_V-kOW6s3jTfnvaBuw_a-XPUEBQ&cad=rja</a>

KENNETH TOMLINSON: I watched a lot of those shows, and I think Mr. Mann’s research demonstrates that the program was clearly liberal advocacy journalism. It was good broadcasting. Bill Moyers is a very capable broadcaster, but it seems to me we should be able to agree that we don’t want bias, and if we do in the interest of provoking debate, if we have some bias on Public Television, just balance it out in the course of the evening. It’s common sense.

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: What was Mr. Mann’s expertise? Why did you happen to hire him? According to Senator Dorgan who’s seen the raw date, he was paid thousands of dollars, his data riddled with spelling errors was faxed to you from a Hallmark store in downtown Indianapolis. What is this Mann’s background for judging a program like Moyers’s program and whether it’s liberal or not?

KENNETH TOMLINSON: Well, he worked for twenty years for the National Journalism Center, which is a 401(c)(3) organization.

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: Well, I got to get to the basic question here. I won’t go through the list of some of Mr. Moyers’s more liberal guests—Frank Gaffney, Grover Norquist, Richard Viguerie, Paul Gigot—on his liberal program—

Democ Now

----

franken truth

22% get news from talk radio; rush on am forces network 274

---

talk radio essential in Davis recall 225, enabled by no Fair Doct , led to Rush

==

<a href="http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/talk_radio.html">http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/talk_radio.html</a>

As this report will document in detail, conservative talk radio undeniably dominates the format:

<ul>

<li>Our analysis in the spring of 2007 of the 257 news/talk stations owned by the top five commercial station owners reveals that 91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and 9 percent is progressive.</li>

<li>

</li>

<li>Each weekday, 2,570 hours and 15 minutes of conservative talk are broadcast on these stations compared to 254 hours of progressive talk—10 times as much conservative talk as progressive talk.</li>

<li>

</li>

<li>A separate analysis of all of the news/talk stations in the top 10 radio markets reveals that 76 percent of the programming in these markets is conservative and 24 percent is progressive, although programming is more balanced in markets such as New York and Chicago.</li>

</ul>

This dynamic is repeated over and over again no matter how the data is analyzed, whether one looks at the number of stations, number of hours, power of stations, or the number of programs. While progressive talk is making inroads on commercial stations, conservative talk continues to be pushed out over the airwaves in greater multiples of hours than progressive talk is broadcast.

===

<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/20/radio-report/">http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/20/radio-report/</a>

<h3>Politically oriented talk radio</h3>

The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States" title="United States">United States</a> saw dramatic growth in the popularity of talk radio during the 1990s. The repeal of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission" title="Federal Communications Commission">FCC</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_doctrine" class="mw-redirect" title="Fairness doctrine">fairness doctrine</a> (which had required that stations provide free air time for responses to any controversial opinions that were broadcast) in 1987 provided an opportunity for a kind of partisan programming that had not previously existed. Pew researchers found in 2004 that 17% of the public regularly listens to talk radio. This audience is mostly male, middle-aged and conservative. Among those who regularly listen to talk radio, 41% are Republican and 28% are Democrats. Furthermore, 45% describe themselves as conservatives, compared with 18% who say they are liberal.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk_radio#cite_note-1">[2]</a>

The most successful pioneer in the 1990s' talk radio movement in the US was the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_conservatism" class="mw-redirect" title="American conservatism">politically conservative</a> commentator <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh" title="Rush Limbaugh">Rush Limbaugh</a>, whose show comes from Clear Channel Communications-owned <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premiere_Radio_Networks" title="Premiere Radio Networks">Premiere Radio Networks</a>. Limbaugh's success demonstrated that there was a nationwide market for passionately-delivered conservative commentary on contemporary news, events, and social trends. Other radio talk show hosts (who describe themselves as either conservative or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism" title="Libertarianism">libertarian</a>) have also had success as nationally-<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast_syndication" title="Broadcast syndication">syndicated</a> hosts, including <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Hewitt" title="Hugh Hewitt">Hugh Hewitt</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Hannity" title="Sean Hannity">Sean Hannity</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Arthur%28radio_host%29" title="Jon Arthur (radio host)">Jon Arthur</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin" title="Mark Levin">Mark Levin</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Medved" title="Michael Medved">Michael Medved</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Ingraham" title="Laura Ingraham">Laura Ingraham</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neal_Boortz" title="Neal Boortz">Neal Boortz</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Savage%28commentator%29" title="Michael Savage (commentator)">Michael Savage</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_O%27Reilly_%28commentator%29" class="mw-redirect" title="Bill O'Reilly (commentator)">Bill O'Reilly</a>, and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Beck" title="Glenn Beck">Glenn Beck</a>.

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk_radio">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk_radio</a>

��

---

Cumulus media organized dixie chick

Clear channel pro-war

-----

<h1 class="firstHeading" id="firstHeading">Talk radio</h1>

<h3 id="siteSub">From SourceWatch</h3>

<div id="contentSub" style=" width: 300px;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio</a></div>

<div id="jump-to-nav">Talk radio is "a peculiarly American phenomenon featuring much rhetoric and not a lot of substance; high volume noise often combined with the absence of facts. An estimated 22 per cent of Americans get their daily news from Talk Radio - bizarre, bigoted and often startlingly misinformed diatribes from radio show hosts hired for their ability to shock first and foremost."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio#cite_note-0" title="">[1]</a>

<h2>Contents</h2>

[<a href="javascript:toggleToc()" class="internal" id="togglelink">hide</a>]</div>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio#Dominated_by_conservatives">1 Dominated by conservatives</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio#Examples">2 Examples</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio#Resources_and_articles">3 Resources and articles</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio#References">3.1 References</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio#External_articles">3.2 External articles</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

</ul>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<h2>Dominated by conservatives</h2>

In 2003, "as the New York Times Magazine quoted <a class="mw-redirect" title="Paul Weyrich" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Paul_Weyrich">Paul Weyrich</a>, who started the <a title="Heritage Foundation" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heritage_Foundation">Heritage Foundation</a>, they (<a title="Think tanks" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Think_tanks">think tanks</a>) have 1,500 <a title="Conservative" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Conservative">conservative</a> radio talk show hosts."<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio#cite_note-1">[2]</a>

<h2>Examples</h2>

<ul>

<li><a title="Air America Radio" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Air_America_Radio">Air America Radio</a></li>

<li><a title="Coast to Coast" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coast_to_Coast">Coast to Coast</a></li>

<li><a title="Michael Savage" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_Savage">Michael Savage</a></li>

<li><a title="Rush Limbaugh" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rush_Limbaugh">Rush Limbaugh</a></li>

</ul>

<h2>Resources and articles</h2>

<h3>References</h3>

<li id="cite_note-0"><a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio#cite_ref-0">��</a> Sheila MacVicar, <a class="external text" rel="nofollow" title="http://web.archive.org/web/20030409205821/http://www.indexonline.org/news/20030319_unitedstates.shtml" href="http://web.archive.org/web/20030409205821/http://www.indexonline.org/news/20030319_unitedstates.shtml">"Talking dirty to the American people,"</a> IndexOnline, March 20, 2003.</li>

<li id="cite_note-1"><a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk_radio#cite_ref-1">↑</a> Bonnie Azab Powell, <a class="external text" rel="nofollow" title="http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml" href="http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml">"Framing the issues: UC Berkeley professor George Lakoff tells how conservatives use language to dominate politics,"</a> UCBerkeleyNews, October 27, 2003.</li>

</ol>

<h3>External articles</h3>

<ul>

<li>Faiz Shakir, <a class="external text" rel="nofollow" title="http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/20/radio-report/" href="http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/20/radio-report/">"REPORT: The Right Wing Domination Of Talk Radio And How To End It,"</a> Think Progress, June 20, 2007.</li>

<li>

</li>

<li><a class="external text" rel="nofollow" title="http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/pdf/talk_radio.pdf" href="http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/pdf/talk_radio.pdf">"The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio,"</a> <a title="Center for American Progress" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_American_Progress">Center for American Progress</a> and Free Press, June 21, 2007.</li>

<li>

</li>

<li>Amanda Terkel, <a class="external text" rel="nofollow" title="http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/21/levin-radio/" href="http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/21/levin-radio/">"Mark Levin’s Grand Left-Wing Conspiracy Theory Falls Apart In First Sentence,"</a> Think Progress, June 21, 2007.</li>

<li>

</li>

<li>Amanda Terkel, <a class="external text" rel="nofollow" title="http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/21/fairness-doctrine/" href="http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/21/fairness-doctrine/">"The ‘Fairness Doctrine’ Myth: Right Wing Falsely Claims Progressives Want To Resurrect Mandatory Balance,"</a> Think Progress, June 21, 2007.</li>

</ul>

</div>

��

huffpo

Ever wonder why the right wing continues to dominate talk radio, even as it loses elections?

"Your Huffington Post piece showed only the tip of the iceberg," a major talk-show figure e-mailed last month following <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mann/limbaughs-dirty-little-se_b_185965.html">my blog here </a>on Rush Limbaugh's empire being built initially by giving his show away for free to hundreds of smaller-market talk stations.

My veteran radio source, assured anonymity, added, "The main story here is vertical integration in the radio business" and the way the big urban talk stations get their programs.

Vertical integration: Precisely what the federal government has moved to ban in the television and movie industries with anti-trust actions. But the radio business has gotten a free pass.

Premiere Radio Networks, which syndicates righties Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Dr. Laura, among others, is owned by the nation's largest radio-station conglomerate, <a href="http://www.clearchannel.com/">Clear Channel.</a> Clear Channel, thanks to FCC deregulation, was allowed to gobble up over 1000 radio stations -- including 16 of the most powerful, (lower-case) clear-channel AM stations in major markets.

Today, Clear Channel either owns or programs most of the nation's 58 strongest, 50,000-watt AM radio stations, liberally stocking them with right-wing talk shows. Among them: Los Angeles' KFI, New York's WABC, Detroit's WJR, Denver's KOA, Portland's KEX, and Chicago's WLS.

Yes, Clear Channel does own liberal Air America stations. But none of them is a 50,000-watt "blowtorch." Instead, Clear Channel puts shows like <a href="http://www.thomhartmann.com">Thom Hartmann's</a> on its smaller, 5,000-and 10,000-watt "sticks" (antennas).

Clear Channel is more than a corporate name. It's also a radio descriptor: A clear-channel radio station is a powerful, 50,000-watt signal with interference-free nightly coverage 750 miles from its city.

Clear Channel owns 17 of those coveted licenses, and its Premiere supplies much of the programming to many of the rest. There are only one or two 50,000-watt stations carrying Air America's -- or any -- liberal shows.

Wherever Clear Channel owns a big AM radio station and other smaller ones, it always puts Premiere's Hannity, Rush, et al on its biggest signal. This puts liberal stations at a big disadvantage in virtually all large markets -- where the real radio money is.

<blockquote>"The prevailing assumption right now in talk radio," one talk programmer told me. "Is that you won't lose money on conservative talk. That could change, but it'll take time."</blockquote>

In the large metropolitan areas where Clear Channel owns station "clusters" -- usually five or more stations -- their sales force concentrates mostly on selling ads for the big, usually right-wing stations.

"If you can sell a 60-second spot for $200 on the big conservative station, or the same spot for $20 on the 5,000-watt liberal station, which one would YOU sell?" a radio sales vet told me during this investigation. Ka ching.

"You need a dedicated sales force for the Air America stations to succeed financially - one that sells ads only for that station."

</blockquote>

There's no doubt San Antonio-based Clear Channel prefers pushing Premiere's largely conservative talkers: I once endured right-wing CNN hack Lou "Broken Borders" Dobbs kiss Clear Channel founder Lowry Mays' butt for an hour while "interviewing" glorified billboard salesman-turned-broadcaster Mays during the keynote event at the National Association of Broadcasters' big convention in San Francisco.

FDR's Justice Department took the powerful movie studios to court in the 1930's in a major antitrust case to stop them from both supplying product to -- and owning -- movie theatres.

In the 1970's, the FCC imposed rules to stop vertical integration by the then-Big Three TV networks: It banned them from owning the shows they aired in prime time. (The so-called "fin-syn" rules).

But radio has gotten a free pass from legal action by the government. Which is the big reason why Premiere and its powerful owner Clear Channel have a stranglehold today on talk radio.

=

abortion doctors

democ now  june 09

Dr. George Tiller was assassinated while in church in Wichita, Kan., on Sunday, May 31st, targeted for legally performing abortions. His death might have been prevented simply through enforcement of existing laws.

The 67 year old doctor faced constant threats and incidents of violence and vandalism including a previous assassination attempt in 1993. Dr. Tiller’s clinic is one of just three in the nation performing late-term abortions after the twenty-first week of pregnancy. Tiller is the eighth abortion provider to be killed since 1977.

http://www.democracynow.org/features/abortion_doctor_killed

---

msnbc on doc:

"The Assassination of Dr. Tiller"

Reavis specifically singles out Operation Rescue, an activist group who posted clinicians' names, photographs, and profiles online. Operation Rescue filed numerous complaints against Tiller's clinic with the Kansas state board. The group takes credit for bringing Tiller’s abortion practice into the national spotlight, particularly on Fox News' "O'Reilly Factor." Host Bill O'Reilly talked about the doctor numerous time, sometimes calling him as "Tiller the Baby Killer."

---

Toxic Talk: How the Radical Right Has Poisoned America's Airwaves [Hardcover]

Bill Press

Fr Cough;in anti-fdr, pro nazi,

'87 FCC abandoned Fairness Doctrine, let AM put lots of talk; '07 90 talk rtwng

Common Nonsense: Glenn Beck and the Triumph of Ignorance [Hardcover]

Alexander Zaitchik

---

newsmax top 25

Rush Limbaugh is more than America's most widely listened-to talk-radio host ("the most listened-to radio host on the planet," he likes to say). He is also the father of the current era of talk radio, and an influential player on America's political scene. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Rush Limbaugh</a> as America's most influential in America.

Bill O'Reilly has established himself as one of the nation's top media personalities. O'Reilly's influence and power derive from being able to throw a double punch — the most-watched cable TV host and a widely syndicated radio host. His twist: He covers world events from a working-class populist perspective. Every week he finds occasions to agree with something a prominent Democratic politician has said, although O'Reilly has also remarked that "the Democratic Party has been hijacked by the far left." NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Bill O'Reilly</a> as America's second most influential in America.

Don Imus is the most curmudgeonly of America's major talk hosts. Although slightly liberal, his sharp tongue slashes Republican and Democratic politicians alike. Imus' unvarnished candor attracts an upscale, urbane audience, which in turn makes big-name pols and savvy writers (or as he calls them, "lying, thieving politicians or liberal weenie pundits") eager to face his fire as guests. His program is the must-listen-to morning show for movers and shakers. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Don Imus</a> as America's third most influential in America.

Michael Savage is individualistic, iconoclastic, and eclectic; a passionate populist who sometimes sounds like a shock jock. He wrote: "Those who listen to me say they hear a bit of Plato, Henry Miller, Jack Kerouac, Moses, Jesus, and Frankenstein." NewsMax 25 Top Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio"> Michael Savage</a> as America's fourth most influential in America.

Sean Hannity is a talk host with a pugilistic demeanor who polarizes issues into contests between good guys in white hats and bad guys in black. His passion and energy make him a powerful and attractive cheerleader for conservative listeners seeking certitude, emotional catharsis, and a gladiatorial champion for their political beliefs. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Sean Hannity</a> as America's fifth most influential in America.

Laura Ingraham is a brilliant, still-rising star whose insider knowledge of government, droll humor, and feisty, fervent conservatism attract more listeners every day to the syndicated radio show she began in 2001. Ingraham speaks from her heart when she says of liberal elitists: "They think you're stupid. They think all freedom-loving Americans are stupid. They think patriotism is stupid. They think church-going is stupid." NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Laura Ingraham</a> as America's sixth most influential in America.

Glenn Beck's relentless good humor can make important topics seem less urgent, he offers a welcome return to an era of civility. Independent-minded Beck is a gentle man who continues to grow as a radio giant. "I hope people feel goodness from my show," he says, "and accept me for who I am, flaws and all." NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Glenn Beck</a> as America's seventh most influential in America.

Dr. Laura Schlessinger is seen as a cultural and political talk host because she — sin of sins — judgmentally asserts that some politically correct behaviors are wrong. Schlessinger is an anchor of firm values in a society morally adrift, and millions tune to her for personal moral rearmament. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Dr. Laura Schlessinger</a> as America's eighth most influential in America.

Neil Boortz, "the talk master," is America's most popular Libertarian talk-show host. He advocates smaller government and more individual liberty. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Neil Boortz</a> as America's ninth most influential in America.

Al Franken, the brightest star of Air America Radio, is the left's latest attempt to create its own Limbaugh, a master of commingling comedy with serious issues. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Al Franken</a> as America's tenth most influential in America.

Mike Gallagher a talk host in the Hannity style who sees right vs. left as right vs. wrong has said, "Our country is battling for her very soul, for patriotism, Judeo-Christian morals, and strong families. Liberal lunatics have surrounded us with their agenda-driven ideology. It's time to fight back." NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Mike Gallagher</a> as America's 11th most influential in America.

Erich "Mancow" Muller is known for his wild behavior. His show features a large cast of characters, adolescent pranks, and a "Drunk Chick Friday" segment. He is very popular for the younger generation of listeners. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Mancow</a> as America's 12th most influential in America.

Howard Stern, the self-proclaimed "king of all media," is a talk-radio superstar whose audience once rivaled Limbaugh's. In 2006, he became the biggest player in direct satellite radio, and, through a $500 plus million deal, the highest paid talk host in the world. He has been called the "the most innovative and high-profile talk host in the business" by Talkers Magazine. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Howard Stern</a> as America's 13th most influential in America.

Bill Bennett's radio show, Morning in America, was launched in April 2004. On the air he often exhibits the patience and certitude of a priest. For Bennett, "The greatest thing about getting up each morning is that I can engage in a conversation with the American people, something I've tried to do for as long as I can remember." NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Bill Bennett</a> as America's 14th most influential in America.

Opie and Anthony epitomize radio's new "cringe" shock jocks, who are always driven to top themselves. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Opie and Anthony</a> as America's 15th most influential in America.

Ed Schultz a converted "moderate" Republican is now a "progressive liberal." Schultz describes himself as a "gun-totin', red meat-eatin' lefty" out to slay the "right-wing radio dragon." NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Ed Schultz</a> as America's 16th most influential in America.

Michael Medved the bright and intellectual self-described "cultural crusader on politics and culture" has always enjoyed debating politics. As he told NewsMax, "I love talk radio because this medium is about ideas and argument." NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Michael Medved</a> as America's 17th most influential in America.

Randi Rhodes is the main "hit man" at Air America Radio, the liberal network launched in 2004 as a partisan ally of the Democratic Party. She wears a button that says "NPR [National Public Radio] Is Nice, I'm Not." She has been described as, "a chain-smoking bottle blonde … [who] is part Joan Rivers, part shock jock Howard Stern, part Saturday Night Live's ‘Coffee Talk' lady. But mostly, she's her rude, crude, loud, brazen, gleefully scatological self," by the Miami Herald. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Randi Rhodes</a> as America's 18th most influential in America.

Jim Bohannon describes himself as "a militant moderate". A soft-edged liberal, Bohannon's nighttime show features calm, sometimes narcoleptic conversation with a wide range of topics, guests, and points of view. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Jim Bohannon</a> as America's 18th most influential in America.

G. Gordon Liddy has brought unique insights about government and the world to more than a million talk-radio listeners. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">G. Gordon Liddy</a> as America's 20th most influential in America.

Diane Rehm is one of the more moderate voices empowered by taxpayer-supported NPR. Her underlying worldview and tone is "eat your broccoli . . . we know best" paternalistic liberalism. She interviews more liberals than conservatives, but welcomes a wide variety of politicians, policy-makers, intellectuals, artists, and authors. She says, "It's crucial we hear not only the voices of policy-makers and experts, but that everyone has a chance to offer their opinions . . ." NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Diane Rehm</a> as America's 21st most influential in America.

Larry Elder is America's pre-eminent libertarian-conservative African-American radio talk show host. He advocates reducing government by 80 percent, abolishing government public schools, and slashing taxes. He coined the term "Victicrat" to describe those who seek political power by claiming to represent victims of racism or poverty. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Larry Elder</a> as America's 22nd most influential in America.

Michael Reagan's radio show is a forum where Republican voices and conservative values come together. NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio">Michael Reagan</a> as America's 23rd most influential in America.

Tammy Bruce is living with one foot at each end of the political spectrum, she has both conservative and liberal critics. But her feisty, courageous, independent-minded approach to issues and her intelligence and humor have won her a large and loyal audience. She describes herself as "a pro-choice, gun-owning, pro-death penalty, openly gay, voted-for-President-Reagan progressive feminist Democrat" and as "half Italian, half Irish, and half troublemaker." NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio"> Tammy Bruce</a> as America's 24th most influential in America.

Tom Leykis, the poor man's Howard Stern, used to focus on politics and boasted that his was the only radio show "not hosted by a right-wing wacko or a convicted felon." NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts rates <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/talkradio"> Tom Leykis</a> as America's 25th most influential in America.

------

</div>