Gloats Rush Limbaugh, as Air America files for bankruptcy. The implication is that his show is "a broadcasting concern," but you've got to wonder: How is his show less about affecting elections than "Air America"?
I like the idea that listeners can tell what the radio guy is up to. We're sensitive to the voice. We can tell when what the speaker wants is to tell you to get in line politically. (I feel the same way about blogging.)
I'm not a big listener of either Limbaugh or Al Franken, but, driving in my car, I've spent some time with both of them.
I think Limbaugh clearly and constantly is trying to get you to agree with his opinions, but he's got a joy in the moment that captures the listener. You know, I am the same age as Limbaugh -- we were actually born on the same day -- and I get the distinct sense that he was influenced by the two great, great radio guys that I listened to every day back in the 60s: Jean Shepherd and Cousin Brucie. These were not political broadcasters as all, just extremely entertaining radio voices.
Al Franken, being a comedian, ought to bring entertainment value to his radio show, but I never got the feeling that he was into the moment, that he had a sense of what it means to be a voice on the radio. He always sounds exasperated, like he's dragged himself to the studio and it's a tough job but somebody's got to do it. Why, oh, why, don't people get it yet? How many times do I have to tell you...
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१९ टिप्पण्या:
There's one obvious way Rush is less about affecting elections than Air America was --- Rush is sufficiently entertaining that he makes a freaking fortune. Certainly he's about making a political point too... but he's about attracting an audience first.
Franken and Air America seem to have missed that step.
Franken was not trying to entertain; he was using his humor as a weapon.
Limbaugh started small, learned and grew accordingly. He and his listeners enjoy themselves.
Air America was a top down oganization from the beginning. There wasn't a lot of joy there.
Rush is very good at what he does, but right wing politics also lends itself to better talk radio.
Bashing bleeding heart liberals, the Islamic terrorists they sympathize with, immigrants, gays, and the media is easy pickins.
Who wouldn't want to hear about how bad all those groups are and how superior we are as a civilization, or would be if it weren't for those effete commies?
The Air America case, that our government has been hijacked by a corrupt cabal that is merely a facilitator of corporate interest, whatever its merits, is kind of a downer.
Talking about the importance of civil liberties makes for less compelling entertainment than demanding the eradication of any group of people responsible for, or sympathetic to, the 9/11 attacks.
I'm not sweating it though. I don't listen to radio, and for those that do, there's still NPR.
I always get the sense that Rush is just a little amused by the fact that so many people (from all political spectrums) take him so seriously, but is smart enough to realize that there is money to be made if he lets them.
But IMO, the relationship the GOP nurtured with the Religious Right is what veered the GOP away from its vision of limited government. And Rush is partly to blame.
This is a great observation and my experience was somewhat the same as yours. Rush and much of the GOP are now very happy with big government as long as they are the ones who are running it.
Depressingly, the Democrats who will now probably gain control of Congress will most likely be even worse. There really is no party of small government at this point.
Johnny -
Thanks for the advice. I wasn't implying that anyone was too stupid to understand just how awful the Bush administration is. Polling data suggests otherwise, so don't worry about our election chances.
I just said it was "kind of a downer."
I never listened to Air America (was it even on the air in San Diego?), so I have no idea if Limbaugh's description of them is correct.
My experience with Limbaugh's program, however, is that it is aimed exclusively at reenforcing the beliefs of conservative listeners. It doesn't aim to convince anyone of anything they didn't already believe. So I doubt it affects elections at all.
Johnny Nucleo said:
"If liberals purge themselves of radical nonsense, convey to Americans that they actually like America too, and get serious about defense, liberals will win."
Bing Johnny- you will never hear Air America DJ's like Randi Rhodes even come close to saying she loves this country. It's one big bash America fest. They should have fixed this IMHO.
Limbaugh is funny, intelligent, cogent, on the mark, and entertaining.
Air America was staffed with hateful, bitter, vile monsters who were exactly the opposite.
How is his show less about affecting elections than "Air America"?
He does his show to make a profit. Air America, obviously, doesn't.
Highly unsurprising then that his show is infinitely better.
Rush was already in his prime and we got eight years of Bill Clinton. It always seemed the obvious rebuttal to complaints that he influences elections.
He's like a friendly neighborhood bar for those of us trying to escape the MSM.
Air America's talent didn't seem like they were having fun. You can't be entertaining if you don't at least seem like you're having fun. Having bumbling flops like Bush, Hastert, and Frist for material they couldn't successfully ridicule the ridiculous. The Moe, Larry, and Curly of political leadership. It was lack of talent on air and in writing that was the problem. Talented lefties can make good dough on NPR and the MSM and were probably all taken.
Johnny Nucleo, as ever, has nailed this. Scroll back up to his comment.
Rush was already in his prime and we got eight years of Bill Clinton. It always seemed the obvious rebuttal to complaints that he influences elections
I seem to recall that Rush couldn't stand Bush Senior, though. So Clinton beating Bush in 1992 doesn't indicate much about Rush's influence one way or the other.
I prefer reading.
O, u r a reader, r u?
Reading's good, but think of all the fun you could have if you tried spelling, too.
I don't agree that talk radio is exclusive to the right. I used to listen to NPR's Talk of the Nation nerly every day and it is/was, I believe, one of their most popular programs. They had no end of idiot left-iberal callers, too, by the way. One had to be reminded by Ray (Suarez) that yes, House members have to be elected every two years (she audibly gasped). Another was absolutely certain that the good people of Cuba really did continuously re-elect Castro with 99% of the vote year after year. This was by no means uncommon.
Then there was the guy from Science Friday (Ira Flatow) who hammered on global warming constantly, but then did a show devoted to his pet theory of alien abductions, I think it was.
The Left likes to dress its dogma up in fancy words and academic language, but it's still all about preaching to the choir.
BTW, Ray Suarez remains one of my favorite radio hosts, at least in his TOTN form. He was obviously a liberal, but he was an exceptionally balanced and knowledgeable host. He familiarized himself with each hour's topic, and was just as critical of liberals as he was of conservatives.
Revenant- Hope u didn't spend too much time figuring out my post...
crash course:
u- you
ur- you're
tho- though
r- are
there's more but i don't want to overwhelm u.
People keep telling me Franken is a comedian, but I don't think I've ever seen him be funny.
Where does this idea come from?
(Yeah, I know he worked on SNL. But SNL's often not funny, either.)
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा