feedback.pdxradio.com » Portland Radio

  1. jr_tech

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,116

    Hopefully we will see some March ratings soon...should be interesting, I suspect that many talk shows got a boost from this mess.

    I would love to see the day by day PPM readings for KEX (and KPOJ as well) as this drama unfolded.

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 02:30 PM #
  2. edust1958

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,484

    I would believe that the ratings for Rush went up during this period. Generally, people are very "base" in their tastes -- no matter how well we try, we all tend to slow and look at the crash at the side of the road... we know that there is a really good possibility that part of the attraction of high-speed motorcar racing is the potential for a fiery crash...

    The bigger question is whether or not the advertisers who stick with him will become tainted by association and suffer financially or if they prosper through higher sales dollars from a smaller segment of the population. We wouldn't know that answer unless the companies are publicly held. Note that if the advertisers just go out of business that may or may not be indicative of the cost of "ugly speech." If the advertisers prosper, it may indicate that 23% of the population can be led like cattle with rings through their noses to buy whatever Rush is hawking...

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 03:09 PM #
  3. Notalent

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 2,414

    Look at mainstream tv and radio, the popularity of fast food, etc. clearly more than 23% of the population can be led like cattle with rings through their noses buying what ever their favorite flavor is hawking.

    Rush claims to have 20 million listeners, that would be less than 23%, But you're the teacher...

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 03:17 PM #
  4. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    Plus or minus, say 5 percent morons?

    @Alfredo: Absolutely! People know what AM Radio is, and Rush did some serious damage on that front. Totally agreed!

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 04:08 PM #
  5. Alfredo_T

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,328

    For the broadcast industry (particularly AM broadcasters) Limbaugh was and is like a deal with the Devil. (I might be repeating myself here.)

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 04:19 PM #
  6. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    Yep the game for them is to marginalize the bad, while remaining capable of leveraging the good.

    Back to the bag of sugar and shit.

    "Lookie here at this fine bag of sugar!"

    "but I see some shit in there"

    "Ahh no worries! It is just a little bit of shit."

    "But it all smells like shit"

    "Mix it in with your drink and you will find the smell just goes away! It's the sugar that counts, not the smell."

    ...Or something like that.

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 04:55 PM #
  7. jr_tech

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,116

    "Tastes like shit.... good thing we no step in it."

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 05:05 PM #
  8. edust1958

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,484

    But you had to taste it to know!

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 05:10 PM #
  9. duxrule

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,963

    "Tastes like shit.... good thing we no step in it."

    A Cheech and Chong classic!

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 05:57 PM #
  10. motozak3

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,469

    "Actually, it appears you are."

    Right back atcha, kiddo.

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 07:25 PM #
  11. This from The International Business Times:

    Limbaugh Lost About 100 Advertisers After First Month’s Boycott But Vows To Carry On
    http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/323457/20120403/rush-limbaugh-sandra-fluke-slut-advertisers-clear.htm

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 09:25 PM #
  12. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    Translation: That contract was well written, and a total pig to service in light of current events, but doing that is cheaper than anything else is.

    Posted on April 3, 2012 - 11:50 PM #
  13. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,878

    >>>"It appears I'm not the one on here who needs to get a life....."<<<

    Actually, it appears you are.

    You can have Deane's since he isn't using it....

    Posted on April 4, 2012 - 03:37 PM #
  14. This is an epic topic that will be here long after the nukes fall...

    Posted on April 4, 2012 - 03:55 PM #
  15. edust1958

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,484

    I wonder if we will still be discussing this after Rush shuffles off this mortal coil?

    Posted on April 4, 2012 - 04:07 PM #
  16. <<<"You can have Deane's since he isn't using it...."<<<

    LOL

    Posted on April 4, 2012 - 05:50 PM #
  17. "As part of the continuing exodus of advertisers from The Rush Limbaugh Show, Arby's and Proactiv both confirmed they will no longer run ads during Rush Limbaugh's show. Ads from both advertisers recently started running during Limbaugh's program."

    Read the entire article from Media Matters:

    More Advertisers Exclude Ads From The Rush Limbaugh Show
    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201204040019

    Posted on April 4, 2012 - 11:57 PM #
  18. JBM

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 261

    And now, for a little balance to this topic:

    Threatened for sticking with Rush, defiant advertiser declares "Battle for America."
    http://spectator.org/archives/2012/04/05/mark-stevens-a-profile-in-cour/

    Posted on April 5, 2012 - 10:13 AM #
  19. JBM: Question - Do You believe I'm posting one side to this topic?

    Posted on April 5, 2012 - 07:57 PM #
  20. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    I don't think so, and am curious what JBM's answer is.

    "Profile in Courage" is pretty funny though! Reads to me like a fresh batch of tasty raw meat for the ditto heads. Those folks that think programming like that is "all American", "family entertainment", probably loyal Dobson listeners too, but that's just me.

    The best solution to all of this would be to just put Limbaugh on subscription media, and let those that think he's fine entertainment, pay for it with few worries. Not sure it's in the public interest to be standing tall for people who devalue women in an actionable way, under public license. That more or less means we condone that treatment as a "public good", or something...

    What I find most entertaining is our "free market" is at work big right now, with most people simply presenting the program material, followed by the simple, direct, honest question, "Is this what your brand / company stands for?"

    Pretty hard to call that terror. It's not like people made stuff up. It's Limbaugh selling really ugly. Seems to me, well informed consumers are the best "market solution" to this issue.

    Either he's worth it, or he's not, right? Who better to answer that question than those sponsoring his program? If he cleans it up, that material gets old, and we all move on. If he doesn't, then people can just keep asking the question, with it all resolving nicely enough in due time.

    Frankly, that has got to be blowing the minds of some "free market" types, likely coming unglued at the idea of "the market" actually not siding with them after their staunch support of it. Hilarious to me!

    Posted on April 5, 2012 - 10:45 PM #
  21. This from Media Matters:

    Walgreens Confirms: No More Ads During Rush Limbaugh's Show
    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201204060005

    Posted on April 7, 2012 - 07:52 PM #
  22. RadioRon

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 108

    I can't believe how far this thread has went! I've never seen such sniviling, whining, slamming, slandering and "rightious self indignation" about such a minor matter! So a conservitive called a liberal a slut, just like liberals have called conservitives sluts. Big deal. Get a life and expend your energy towards something useful. I'm tempted to beleive Michael Savage's statment that liberalism is a mental disease!

    Posted on April 7, 2012 - 11:40 PM #
  23. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    LOL!!

    There are your "market forces" at work Radio Ron. Seems to me, the definition of "minor" has some variance to it.

    Let's see, they canned Imus for "knappy hoes", a clear instance of "fleeting" insulting. Limbaugh teed up for three days, issuing at least 53 instances of "fleeting" speech, some of which are actionable.

    At least some significant fraction, about 50 percent actually, might be inclined to disagree on "minor", but let's just have that "free market" work as intended, right?

    Posted on April 7, 2012 - 11:58 PM #
  24. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 6,030

    RR sez: Get a life and expend your energy towards something useful

    Like faster horses and older whiskey? Uh, no.

    Posted on April 8, 2012 - 12:04 AM #
  25. RadioRon

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 108

    You forgot the "younger women, more money". It's a line from a country song. I thought some people might recognize it as such and be amused. You guys really need to lighten up and not get an ulcer. My real interest is strapping an airplane to my ass and trying not to scare myself too badly

    Posted on April 8, 2012 - 03:35 AM #
  26. "Rush Limbaugh pushed that envelope in a new way, and that is why he took particular punishment for what he did. He attacked a private citizen, somebody with no fame who is not seeking any fame. The woman who became the object of Rush’s horrible name calling attack is not comparable to Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, or any of the other conservative women who have been slurred. They are public figures and choose to be so."

    Read more from The Lansing State Journal:

    Limbaugh's Attack On Private Citizen Was Particularly Vile
    http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20120407/OPINION02/304070004/Limbaugh-s-attack-private-citizen-particularly-vile?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE%7Cs

    Posted on April 8, 2012 - 03:57 AM #
  27. "somebody with no fame who is not seeking any fame."

    Not quite true!

    "The Lansing State Journal"

    A bit of a liberal rag.

    Posted on April 8, 2012 - 04:33 AM #
  28. RadioRon

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 108

    I escaped from the Peoples Socialist Republic of Michigan and emigrated to Orygun back in '76. All the papers there are PC and very liberal. The only thing that wasn't slanted was the TV Guide section. The only thing that I miss from there are some friends that I had to leave behind and my unit in the MI ANG at Selfridge ANGB.

    Posted on April 8, 2012 - 04:53 AM #
  29. semoochie

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,960

    KKEY used to have a talk show host, who referred to "The People's Republic of Oregon". You just can't win!

    Posted on April 8, 2012 - 12:06 PM #
  30. RadioRon

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 108

    Yeah, livability and quality of life has went down noticeably since I moved here in '76. While I enjoy Salem things were a lot looser in K-Falls where I first lived. It's probably all those damned easterners like me moving here. I was raised in Nevada and never did like Michigan eventhough I was born there.

    Posted on April 8, 2012 - 03:58 PM #
  31. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

  32. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 6,030

    From kskd's link: Because it is distributed by Premiere, Fox Radio News, it now appears, has been inadvertently hit by the same advertising boycott as the Limbaugh talk radio show

    Heh.

    I know this is easy for me to say not having income dependent on radio advertising revenue, but just the same, those in the business milked off the Rush gravy train for years enabling this kind of hate in our society.

    Karma is a bitch.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 12:25 AM #
  33. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    I linked those two pieces to highlight how social media is changing some of the dynamics of things. Some of the most potent activism right now happens to come from ordinary people who found themselves compelled to act! Facebook is simple, and the ability to communicate in basic ways empowers them to act.

    They can share data, put information out there suitable for attracting others who want to act, get organized into groups, and contribute news / successes / failures. This is enough to build with, and it appears the building of movement politics is alive and well on FB.

    There are people, who really don't want to whore out their lives to Zuck (and what a nickname! Love it.) and who would never be caught dead using FB, signing up to do something they feel necessary to do. I've watched FB grow over the years, and I personally don't do all that much with it, and to date, no politics with it. That divide between "facebook willing" and "facebook unwilling" has been fairly constant, until this last couple of years.

    Komen kicked it off, and the strategy of having female conversations on legislator pages, company pages, etc... actually worked very well, and was funny as all get out. FB actually made some changes to help balance that. (closing comments, editorial features...)

    The correction was simply to make fan pages get more likes, or an amount of likes on par with the targeted page, having very similar results!! Worse, as a fan page, the entity being targeted with speech action has no editorial control, leaving a dilemma:

    Risk allowing something like that to grow, or tolerate comments, or simply change policy direction and do more of the right things.

    It appears the cost of ownership for bad speech and policy is going up rapidly. I find this so perfectly American! The "market" dynamics of it are particularly entertaining. First Amendment indeed! In many cases, free market supporters love free markets, until they don't, favoring regulation, seeking "protection" from Uncle Sam. Funny how that works, isn't it?

    The word "boycott" needs clarification too. In the vast majority of advocacy instances I've seen and been a part of so far (and I've only done a few, because life is expensive for me right now), the Spocko method is the primary tool of choice. (I've linked it before, and a quick google of "spocko method" gets you there quick)

    1. Gather up Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. speech that is undesirable.

    2. Gather up sponsors, crowd source valid contact info, FB pages, e-mail, web, phone, etc...

    3. Establish contact and simply ask them, "Is this speech what your brand / company is about?"

    4. Demonstrate alternatives

    5. For larger companies, publish that for momentum. For smaller ones, do not publish. (lots of smaller advertizers wish to remain off the larger radar for fear of blow back that is too expensive for them and nobody wants people out of business, because that puts ordinary people outta work)

    6. Recognize and patronize those who are well aligned with ordinary people.

    7. Wash, rinse, repeat.

    The "boycott" isn't telling companies people won't do business with them. People will, when the brand / company is about things that make sense. Emphasizing that is the key to the method in that there is a clear incentive to do the right things and get rewarded for it. A simple boycott changes things, and it may make sense to continue advertizing on the show, simply over a numbers game / cost of doing business basis, favoring Rush. (and that is the primary argument he makes)

    The "boycott" is all about simply not using his venue to promote new business, favoring everybody but Rush, and those on his coattails, which appear to be considerable.

    You won't find direct links to the activism sites in the material I linked. When I read it, I liked the analysis and simple reporting done, puzzled over the lack of "it's right here" info, which devalued the pieces for me considerably to the point where I was not going to link them. (Dkos can be toxic, for obvious bias reasons, and that's understandable)

    The answer made the decision for me. Death threats and publishing of personal info in places that are suggestive of bad things happening. What's interesting about that is the negative speech isn't explained away, nor the arguments rebutted / debunked. It's just an attempt to intimidate and bully painful people away, regardless of the actual merits their speech may or may not have.

    Because of that, some of the info there is anecdotal. A quick search or two, either with the Google, or FB, gets one quickly to a number of hubs of activity. From there, some participation rolls one right up to the more consistent activity centers. That's remarkable in that NO active promotion of the grassroots efforts is going on. There is the media coverage pro and con, with various entities reporting the major moves and players. Then there is the person to person movement running underneath that, more or less not impacted by media coverage, and focused on a longer term result, not some headline for the week, or shiny thing as we know media to fixate on. (again, understandable, not a negative, just reality)

    "Left wing groups" include school teachers, moms, home makers, dads, and others motivated to act on the threat of seeing their daughters pushed back in terms of their civil liberties and equality 100 years or so. That's notable, because it's not funded, there is no "Soros" consipracy, etc... just pissed off people expressing that in a potent way.

    Of course, that is the other argument Limbaugh makes, attempting to play the martyr.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 07:43 AM #
  34. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    For the record, I am not pleased at all to see non-political formats impacted, and watching Bain put the capital vice on CC won't be pretty either.

    Yeah, karma. Much earlier in the thread it was asked, "what cost?" and it appears Limbaugh and friends are very, very expensive!

    Seems to me, a window is opening here to "re-introduce" radio as a discussion format, and entertainment format. There are a lot of potential new listeners and established ones looking for reasons to stay. Somebody somewhere might be able to spin this as an opportunity.

    Enter new efforts like Huckabee, who by the way is damn near as ugly as Limbaugh is with his policy advocacy, the difference being he's a really nice guy. It will be interesting to see if the material elements of policy remain at issue, or just the ugly presentation of such.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 07:55 AM #
  35. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    Anyone enjoy Marvel comics? I've always liked how their superheros are created. There is some basic wrong deed, difficult circumstance, force of nature or fantastic element, etc... where some ordinary person steps up, or is transformed into a super person, who then goes off and does super-type stuff!

    Well, Limbaugh has created this:

    http://jezebel.com/5898730/sandra-fluke-apparently-running-for-office

    Having been forced into the public sphere proper, she's going to deal with it, work the process and maybe do some good. This comment highlights the core of the controversy fueling this non story that keeps growing:

    Our sons must grow up seeing women walking the halls of Congress. Because then they will know that if you want to call a woman a name, you have three options: congresswoman, senator, or Ms. President.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 08:05 AM #
  36. Just what we need, another left wing pig in politics.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 08:13 AM #
  37. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    By the way Deane, she clearly isn't taking any shit from regressives. A fine example of how to deal with bullies.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 08:25 AM #
  38. What's a regressive?

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 08:42 AM #
  39. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,878

    YOU!

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 09:06 AM #
  40. >>>"YOU!"<<<

    So, it's a positive thing then.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 09:17 AM #
  41. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    Regressives fail to recognize, and often desire a rollback of social progress.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 09:34 AM #
  42. semoochie

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,960

    Isn't that a reactionary?

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 10:01 AM #
  43. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,878

    >>>"YOU!"<<<

    So, it's a positive thing then.

    LOL!!!!!!!!

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 10:04 AM #
  44. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    Well, I don't know Semoochie.

    I have a very hard time characterizing these people as "conservatives", because the conservative values I grew up around didn't include this kind of garbage.

    Really, it is a rollback on things long established. In computer code, and engineering, we call that a regression.

    So then, politically, calling them regressives isn't really out of line, or even negative! It's just reality on where they are right now. Limbaugh, Santorum, the GOP base in general are all pretty well aligned with regression, not solutions, nor progress.

    I could very easily just revert to "Republicans", or "conservatives", which might be clearer, but then not really recognizing conservatives and or Republicans who clearly understand this behavior is crap.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 10:55 AM #
  45. JBM

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 261

    Craig, I didn't necessarily mean that you only posted the left-wing side of the coin. I simply made my post to counter the Media Matters talking points. It seems like there are tons of people on here taking the liberal/left side, so I wanted to ensure the other side had its say too.

    BTW, when I was a news intern at a TV station in the Rust Belt in 1980, I was working a rare mid-week evening shift editing tape with the 6/11 p.m. anchor. We were working on a story about the Reagan/Carter campaign when I made a positive remark about Reagan. The anchorman turned to me with a genuinely astonished look.

    "You actually support Reagan?"

    "Yes, I do."

    "Well," he harrumphed, "you're the only one at this station who does."

    Judging from the remarks about the Limbaugh controversy, I'd say you are reinforcing some of the stereotypes about liberal domination of the broadcasting industry. Since the advent of right-wing talk radio, conservatives have made more inroads, but you all seem to be doing a good job of living up to the stereotype.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 08:03 PM #
  46. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 14,971

    Thanks, BTW. Was curious about your answer, wondering where you were really at on it JBM.

    When discussing "the liberal media", I don't think it makes any sense to do without some qualifiers.

    On social issues? Deffo liberal. Honestly, that's the general trend anyway, with a nice steady arc of progress along those lines being typical of our national politics, however painful it may be at any one time. The vast majority of reporting is framed in terms of ordinary people, with the odd exception here and there, and clearly a core not-liberal core, arguably centered around Limbaugh, et al.

    On economic issues? It's not liberal at all! The general trend is still liberal, or maybe just progressive, though it's nowhere near as clear as social issues currently are. Our history varies too, not the same trend at all, with many regressions, progress, stalls being present. If one looks at Reagan, there is a strong regressive streak in play, which defines the current fault lines, where liberals are linking "change" to some deviation, and arguably, return to pre-Reagan times, that window extending back roughly to post-depression era economics. I get the distinct feeling the current economic regressives, using this rough definition, would gladly return us to depression era economic policy, eliminating the New Deal entirely.

    Very little reporting is framed in terms of labor. That wasn't always true, and I remember stories written from that perspective as a kid. Mrs. Siracusa actually highlighted them for us to compare and contrast in 6th grade.

    (yes, I remember nearly every year of school that way --it's odd, I know)

    Arguably, we simply don't have economically liberal media. Outlets like MSNBC do lean liberal, but are often and frankly, tepid compared to more balanced international media, where "both sides of the story" can regularly be seen, compared and contrasted by ordinary people on a regular basis.

    On this matter then, I completely agree with you. Limbaugh is caught up in an arguably liberal hornets nest!

    The real question is, "Should he be?", and or "Does balancing that make sense?"

    My personal answers are, "Yes, absolutely. Treating women that way isn't acceptable where I come from." And: "Yes, but you might be surprised by my answer; namely, subscription media can and should have far more latitude than public media under license does, because treating women that way does not serve the public interest."

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 08:45 PM #
  47. JBM "It seems like there are tons of people on here taking the liberal/left side, so I wanted to ensure the other side had its say too."

    Agreed! I'm for hearing all sides of this story and I post both sides. Having one side, I think would be BORING! Both sides also brings out more posters on this thread.

    Posted on April 9, 2012 - 09:40 PM #
  48. semoochie

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,960

    The way this was explained to me, "moderate" is in the middle. To the left is "liberal" and further left is "radical". To the right is "conservative" and further right is "reactionary". What you describe as "regressive" sounds very much like "reactionary" to me. Actually, if you go further from either extreme, you meet up, forming a circle but it's late and I don't want to get into that.

    Posted on April 10, 2012 - 02:20 AM #
  49. This from The Topeka Capitol-Journal:

    How's That Boycott Thing Going Anyway?
    http://cjonline.com/blog-post/kevin-mcginty/2012-04-09/hows-rush-limbaugh-boycott-going

    Posted on April 10, 2012 - 02:56 AM #
  50. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 6,030


RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.