I have a few things from NewsBusters I wanted to share with you. The first is from an MSNBC interview with Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT). He is a self proclaimed Socialist, and spends a lot of time attacking FoxNews and calling for more liberal voices:
""I'll tell you what else we need to do," Sanders said. "We need to understand that it is very, very hard for the president or anybody else to take on not just the Republican Party, that's the easy part - to take on all of right-wing talk radio, which covers 90 percent of talk show hosts, a whole Fox network which is nothing more than an arm of the Republican Party and the Democrats got to think long term. Why is there not a progressive television network? Why aren't we supporting good and effective personalities on radio as well and building up a network there so that we can that kind of political consciousness-raising that the Republicans, in fact, are doing so well right now.""
Where to begin?
Okay, first of all, FoxNews and conservative radio are doing well because their content appeals to viewers/listeners. That's the formula for success that the liberals apparently just can't seem to grasp. Pretty simple, and yet, they just don't get it.
They desperately want this to be a far-left country, but it isn't. FoxNews, aside from some conservatively biased prime-time hosts (as CNN and MSNBC have liberally biased primetime hosts) really is fair and balanced. The liberals will fight you to the death on that notion, but there have been independent studies that prove that fact. They try very hard to give both sides of the debate, and the viewer can take from it what they want. They trust that the viewer knows their own mind, something the liberal channels don't - they are of the mindset that information must be spun and then spoon-fed in order for the idiots out there in T.V. land to understand it. Talk down to your audience and you tend to lose them.
Secondly, there IS a liberal talk radio network - AirAmerica.
It has had major issues both financially and with lack of listeners. It went bankrupt back in 2006, but, like (Al) Frankenstein's Monster, it just won't seem to die, even though most people think it has. Why does it have such issues when, according to people like Sen. Sanders, the American public is craving lefty radio? Well, mostly because it sucks. I can't imagine why, what with shining stars such as Janeane Garofalo, Randi Rhodes and Al Franken...oh, okay, I just proved my point.
Anyhoo....As for a 'Progressive television network', isn't that MSNBC? Or maybe NBC, the National Barack Channel - all Barack, all the time, all positive spin? What about CNN? I suppose he means channels people actually watch, which would rule out all three. Thus his dislike of FoxNews, because people really do actually watch it, and in record numbers, no less.
In the same vein, there is this little gem:
"Matt Cover at the Media Research Center's News Division, CNSNews.com, has a piece out today entitled "FCC’s Chief Diversity Officer Wants Private Broadcasters to Pay a Sum Equal to Their Total Operating Costs to Fund Public Broadcasting."
This is insane. The "Chief Diversity Officer" in question, Mark Lloyd, is calling for the gross operating budget for every private radio station each year to be the fee (tax) they pay for their broadcast license for the year, with the monies going to the always liberal public stations. With whom they then must compete for listeners. "
Since they can't seem to make successful stations on their own, they are going to try to rape and pillage successful (read: conservative) radio stations.
By hook or by crook, huh?