The rise of Limbaugh also coincided with the aftermath of the Reagan years and the need to deify everything Reagan did. Growing up, I always remember the country club Republican crowd proclaiming moral superiority over Bill Clinton. Limbaugh scratched that itch for them. It’s no surprise that their savior became Donald Trump, a man so morally broken and bankrupt that he detests his own followers.
As historian Brian Rosenwald argues, left-wing talk radio hosts had to compete for listeners with government-subsidized, center-left NPR affiliates, while right-wing hosts had a clearer competitive field. Station owners could guarantee a larger audience to advertisers simply by picking right-wing instead of left-wing talk radio programs. Talk radio's conservative bent is the unintended product of the government's halfhearted attempt to create a nationalized broadcasting system in the 1970s. (Though I wouldn't expect a "Rush was Made Possible By Listeners like You" slogan to appear on a complimentary NPR tote bag any time soon.)
Right, that's the 'Liberals don't need people to tell them how to think part. And while I don't disagree with any of your points, they all are 'what conservatives that are left are just dumb' to me. Each of these things is a flaw in reasoning. It's one of the biggest factors in them shedding people. They lost their principled people because the lies were just too obvious, they lost their business backing because they are so dumb they are damaging the business environment. Now they are losing patriots because some with a brain finally realized they were the baddies.
I'm afraid I don't understand your "gfy" rating on this post, @tafkats. Do you disagree with it? If so, why? It doesn't even seem ambiguous to me. If it was some right-wing poster who gave it the rating you did, I would just shrug it off, but since I respect you quite a bit, I really would like to understand what you find so objectionable about what I wrote.
Well, maybe he thinks massaging your prostate with a middle digit will bring you pleasure, and it's actually well-wishing.
I wonder if Anc is aware that many Democratic voters/liberals are against abortion? Or that they...gasp! own guns? Naaaa, easier to generalize & broad brush.
The biggest difference in Right wing talk show popularity and Left wing talk show popularity is that the Right wing has a smaller range of priorities. If the Right wing host claims to be a Christian, anti-abortion, pro-gun, they have a greater chance of being successful. Even better if they can get in as many anti-liberal insults as they can as well as catering to ... I won't call them fears like others do, but definitely speak out against anything that isn't in their comfort zone. - anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-weak. The Left, on the other hand, has a broad spectrum of people who oppose traditional "Christian", "anti-abortion", "pro-gun" thinking. There are women who are militant "women are not inferior to men". Then there are militant "LGBT are not inferior to straight". And "Black people are not inferior to white". All are correct, but some may feel their issue is more important than another. Some may even be against another. Not all women are pro-LGBT. Some militant women's rights advocates are racist. This is the problem the Left has. It's nearly impossible to put all left wing ideals into one box. This is why Left wing talk radio hosts are not as popular as Right wing. And, it's also why it's more difficult for a Democratic politician to hold their ground and stay true to the Left. They always have to compromise.
interesting take on it. The most successful strategy for Democratic politicians then would be to present as general & bland a platform as possible versus jumping full-bore into specifics. Better to leave some doubt than to risk alienating entire groups of potential voters. So maybe it was smart for the Democrats to push Biden into the front of the pack because as a long term career politician he knows what to say & what not to say/what to do & what not to do to appeal to largest percentage of potential voters. Just a theory, there could have been other reasons why Biden ended up running against Trump.
Uh, that's kind of what he said, isn't it? The views among conservatives are much more homogeneous than among liberals. You might think you're disagreeing with him, that you have found some sort of "gotcha" moment, but in fact you are agreeing with him. If you want to keep most things pretty much the way they are (conservatives), then that pretty much puts you in the same mold as everyone else who wants to keep most things pretty much the way they are. But if you want to change things, which things you want to change, how much, and in what way, can vary enormously from one person to another. Is there anything wrong with that? And given all that, where is the "broad brush" in saying that conservatives' views, overall, are more homogeneous than liberals' views?
I understand it just fine! But the kneejerk seems to be bringing up "abortion & guns" as conservative tropes when these things also concern liberals (though they won't often admit it) as well. So while it may not be apparent (thanks MSM!) conservatives do indeed care about other issues. Of course most (not all) liberals want to present themselves as being much more sophisticated and nuanced than conservatives. That's the nature of the beast for the most part. IMHO everybody wants to simplify/take the low hanging fruit when it comes to interpreting the motivations of the other side.
Two things: 1) Liberals who care about gun rights still vote for Democrats because they realize that, hysterical rhetoric from the NRA notwithstanding, gun ownership in this country is not in any danger. The debate isn't between gun ownership and no gun ownership; the debate is between gun ownership with a handful of precautions and gun ownership without those precautions. 2) Liberals who don't like abortion still vote for Democrats because historically, the biggest decreases in abortion rates have happened under Democratic administrations. The best ways to reduce abortions are (a) expanded access to birth control, which Democrats are more likely to support, and (b) broad-based economic prosperity, which is more likely with Democratic policies.
No. You don’t seem to be understanding the point. I never said or hinted that abortion and guns are solely conservative concerns. Try rereading what I wrote without the knee jerk reaction to the words abortion and guns.
whatever. No matter how I interpret it you'll say I misunderstood it so anyway what's the difference? You win , you're the smartest guy in the room as always.
It’s even worse than that. Many in the liberal camp have priorities that can be in opposition to each other. Traditional Labor lefties (manufacturing / construction / transportation / resource extraction) have VERY different views and priorities from environmental lefties. Race and Social Justice lefties v Social-Dem lefties (see Bernie or @RickDeckard here). Many Black and Hispanic lefties have very different views on the role of religion in public life than secular lefties, etc. etc.
I for one am shocked, shocked you are too lazy to try and defend your position and too butthurt to admit you’re wrong.
Part of the reason is the nature of the business itself. A general manager I worked for explained that someone who polarizes an audience has much greater potential to attract an audience than someone who doesn't offend anyone (or at least doesn't go out of their way to offend, or doesn't offend as many). Radio picked up on this first because the number of outlets lent itself to what's called "narrowcasting" as opposed to "broadcasting." It's not a coincidence that when we had 3 networks growing up that the programming was much more homogenous. As the digital era dawned television programmers bought into the narrowcasting concept, which means targeting a specific demographic and trying to maximize it, as opposed to going for the largest possible audience. In radio it shows up with talk stations and sports stations, which have proportionally smaller audiences, but are able to draw specific target audiences that advertisers find attractive. As others have noted, "conservative" talk covers much less territory than "liberal" talk and the potential audience is much less diverse, making it easier to target.
If by "talent" you mean "attacking 13-year-old kids and developing segments where they mock and celebrate the deaths of AIDS patients," I guess that's true.
