Collapse of AM music important (though it survived into the late 80s; my dad had a K Car with only an AM band and found lots of oldies stations, hence my memories of him driving while miming cracking a whip and singing along to “Mule Train”). But shift in ownership rules… 1/2
… and end of Fairness Doctrine helped create infrastructure, political cover for networks of political radio. It didn’t *create* political talk radio, it fostered its spread.
This makes no sense. At best, you could argue (I think) that some stations were less jumpy about political talkers, but offensive right-wingers on radio long predated Rush and were there during the golden days of the Fairness Doctrine.
BTW, saw shameful amount of shoeless feet on transatlantic flights a few weeks ago. We might disagree on talk radio, but on this issue we are in lockstep.
In coach I assume, among the unwashed
Indeed, as I am a poor academic, sir. But I’d bet the comfy footrests and lounging in first class encouraged uncouth manners as well.
It does make sense, and I think we might be more in agreement than it seems. You’re focused on content, I’m pointing to *spread* of content. End of FD allows monovocal content; ownership rules allow that to spread.
You're still stuck on the idea that the end of the FD allowed "monovocal content." That's just wrong. Syndication is what gave Limbaugh his power. But again, it's possible that without the FD, some station owners might have been preemptively hesitant. But that was solved by *buying* them.
And end of FD ended any need to offer counter arguments. Thus buying stations up is less risky—no national risk of orders to add other voices, more viable to build monovocal network.
I give up. You still don't understand what happened when the FD was in effect.
I was there.
Whose voices? I’m for the unfairness doctrine: absolutely no opinion on public airwaves. Just weather and agricultural reports. Take that hippies!
Unfairness Doctrine? Try Unfun Doctrine!
I implore you to write about the FD/genesis/fallout. This back & forth over the yrs drives me batshit. My uneasy gut about the subj always leads me to "for my friends everything, for my enemies the law," which seems to me why Rs/Cons can lie with impunity while Democracy dies by a thousand cuts.
FD was imperfect (and used by Dems against small-town/rural conservative stations more than by GOP against leftists), but at root it was about media’s civic responsibility in use of finite public resource. End of FD severs media/civic responsibility link… 1/2
…and reduces reasons for challenges to licenses (fewer potential legal headaches for networks). This doesn’t create political talk radio, but it and ownership-law changes make it more viable. It’s an article of faith among Reagan Repubs that 80s deregulation had few if any downstream negatives. 2/3
As I said to someone else, Trump isn’t an aberration, he is the legacy of the GOP’s last 40 years; Reagan said liberal Repubs should leave party & govt was problem, lied about all sorts of things; Gingrich laid path for McConnell’s Party of No; Bush II falsified data and smeared opponents.
Yes, the end of the need to offer counterarguments at 3:17am on Sundays. Eliminated that made a *huge* difference. (I assume you're not falsely claiming the FD required on-show counterarguments.)