http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/18/white-house-opposes-fair ness-doctrine/

That's the smartest thing I've heard him say yet!

is that then a flip-flop??

Exactly what was the Fairness Doctrine? Can you show the legislation that created it? What were the provisions of the Fairness Doctrine.

Please, no straw-men!

Fairness Doctrine

Obama's public statements have always reflected opposition to a revival of the fairness doctrine.

This was an attempt by conservative radio and TV to stir up controvery by repeating "Obama's gonna bring back the fairness doctrine and muffle conservative talk" so often many folks started believing it. A few congressional dems have muttered about reviving it... but they get virtually no support.

People have way too many choices today for their information and indoctrination...there's ALWAYS somewhere where the opposing viewpoint can be heard. The government no longer needs to insist that every single station air every side of every issue.

but I heard some hOUSE AND sENATEDems in Wash DC speake in favor of it and SPEAK againstONE-SIDED talk radio!!!Thhey are not all on the SAME PAGE APPARENTLY!!SOME WANT IT, SOME DO NOT!THAT IS A FLIP-FLOP!!!

Before accusing anyone of a "flip flop", learn to type, otherwise it's YOU that's the flop!

Fox, (I know...consider the source), had a report last night that the reason Obama is against it is they would lose allies like NBC and PBS, and to a lesser extent ABC and CBS.

Bottom line is don't we have more critical problems to worry about right now?

Yeah, fix the ownership issue and get some people back to work!

It's a two-fer! The cry for a fairness doctrine will go away, and more media jobs will open up! Win-win.

Exactly. I've long thought the limit should be one station (or more precisely, one license) per owner. I'd now be willing to modify that rule in the case of AM's where needed to keep them on the air. Vastly increase ownership diversity and the "fairness" problem will largely fix itself.

(I've often wondered if all the talk-radio hysteria over the supposed return of the fairness doctrine is at least partly a smokescreen, to pre-empt any discussion of the ownership issue. There must be some reason why no one ever seems to bring it up on the air.)

One station per owner? Do you guys actually understand how radio works?

For the sake of a number --

350 days a year (I'm buffering 15 days for unsold inventory)
18 hours a day (I'm giving 6a-7p full rate, 7p-5a half rate...these are generous)
10 units an hour at an average unit rate of $100

Equals $5.4 million dollars inflow

Expenses (if the station were given free - zero debt service)

Salaries - Multiply each of YOUR proposed salaries by 1.6 to include company costs of insurance, share of FICA, unemployment insurance.

GM
Engineer
SM
Sales
Sales
Sales
Sales
Sales Assist
Reception
Finance
Traffic Logs
Production
PD
Morning
News
Midday/Music dir.
Afternoon
Nights
Promotion


(feel free to add a second person to the news department, a second body and/or producer to the morning and afternoon shows, and a traffic reports person if your station can afford it!!)

Fixed Expenses:

Rent
Heat
Electricity (huge)
Equipment
Supplies
Liability Insurance
Auto insurance for traded vehicles
Fire/Theft etc. insurance
Federal Tax (30%)
State Tax (12%)
City Business Tax


Show me your budget!

would the Chicago stations (KKKA,KGDA)RUN BY rEV. wRIGHT be exempt?THAT IS A POORMJOKE PDXRADIO PEOPLE!!!

62kgw wrote:

is that then a flip-flop??

Not when it's PRO-conservative. As Skybill cited, that makes it smart thinking. Now if he flip-flopped the other way, THAT would be a flip-flop. Is that pretty close Skybill?

"One station per owner? Do you guys actually understand how radio works? "

It worked that way for a long time. The demise of that model was caused by allowing a single entity to own multiple stations in a market and unlimited national licenses.

Please no revisionism. Don't reverse cause and effect.

"Show me your budget!"

I've done several over the years. It can be done. It requires upper level management to not take huge salaries and a slightly smaller staff where only key positions can be held by experienced and properly compensated people. The idea or notion of starting small and building up used to be viable in all but the top 15 markets. That is no longer possible because the competition is holding 6 to 8 licenses in the market and operating to a different model. It's apples and oranges unless the government levels the playing field. Small stations can make money, just not the zillions that todays megagroups have to generate to keep stockholders at bay. Again, don't convolute the model to try and fit todays scenario, it won't. The model changed and to survive today you have to automate and sell packages across all your outlets, etc. etc.

First you have to change the industry to something more competitive at the entry level.

ARE THER ENTRY-LEVEL UPPER-MANAGEMENT OPPENINGS ANYWHERE?

Not when it's PRO-conservative...

It's not pro conservative. It's pro free speech.

The ONLY people that support the (un)Fairness Doctrine are the ones against people like Rush and the other conservative talk shows.

The public decides what shows stay and what shows go by patronizing the advertisers of those shows.

Want more liberal talk shows? Find a good host and advertisers then go out and buy their product.

Easy as that.

If the tables were turned and the libs had lots of successful talk shows and this bill came up they would be screaming censorship at the top of their lungs.

I don't listen to any of the talk shows, so I don't really care who is on the air and who isn't.

Actually it just isn't that easy until we have more owners competing.

Agreed past that however. Also worth noting, the public can also push back by not buying from those who support programming they don't agree with, as well as by informing others about who owns who.

the public can also push back by not buying from those who support programming they don't agree with, as well as by informing others about who owns who.

Exactly. That's how the free market system works. (Or at least how it's supposed to work!)

If we get more owners, it will work exactly that way.

Right now, it's kind of broken. Until that's addressed we don't have an equitable marketplace.