Media Guy 
Member since Feb 27, 2009

OtherArea: East memphis



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “The Rant

Sorry, Chris, but my comments do strike to the heart of the matter. If there wasn't a market that wanted to hear the stuff that AFR spews, they wouldn't be on the air. That does not mean you have to listen to it. Conversely, I don't have to listen to liberal drivel. The issue at hand in your column should be whether an American has the right to speak as they wish, no matter how abhorrent others may find their speech. There are many pundits that I have serious disagreements that have major platforms to speak their throught from. But in a free market, the masses decide what they want to listen to, and the demise of liberal talk on radio is a good indication that it simply is not marketable. The last thing I want is government deciding what I can or cannot watch or listen to, which seems to be the position you advocate. Once again I ask, where is the "valid opposing point of view" in your publication?

Posted by Chuck Crossno on 02/27/2009 at 1:58 PM

Re: “The Rant

Chris, the main problem you face is one of economics. Conservative talk radio thrives because the target one that a great number of businesses seek to reach. The business to business appeal of talk radio is what keeps it viable. Rush got a $400 million contract for one simple reason...he generates revenue for the network that provides his show, for the radio stations that carry it, and for the sales reps who sell it. The failure of liberal talk radio in this country is again, purely economic. Randi Rhodes, Al Franken, and the like never generated an audience that advertisers wanted to reach, or if they did, it was on that could be reached more economicaly through other media. Face it, conservative business owners...and I defy you to find very many liberal business owners...simply won't listen to what the libs have to say. And just because someone has an opinion does not give them the 'right' to have access to he airwaves. We have a marketplace of ideas, and if you idea is rejected by the masses, why should you be given a platform to spout your views? The Senate just passed legislation that would permanently ban the Fairness Doctrine, the House will pass it, and Obama says he'll sign it. Only 11 Senators voted against the measure, which to me is a sign that having the government dictate what we hear on the radio and see on TV is a really bad idea. You have the right to your opinions, but there is no guarantee that anyone else has to listen to it. You, as a consumer of the media, have the ultimate censorship device at your's called an "OFF" button. i also disagree with just about every viewpoint that the station you cite spouts, but as a free American, I'm not forced to listen to it. I may well disagree with what you have to say, but i will defend to the death your right to say it...n matter how wrong i think you may be. By the way, please note that as so-called "Fairness Doctrine" only aplies to the electronic media, not to print. What would the Flyer become if you were required to print a "valid opposing oint of view" for every left-leaning article you ran?

Posted by Chuck Crossno on 02/27/2009 at 9:17 AM


Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
© 1996-2018

Contemporary Media
460 Tennessee Street, 2nd Floor | Memphis, TN 38103
Visit our other sites: Memphis Magazine | Memphis Parent | Inside Memphis Business
Powered by Foundation