Where are the liberal radio talk show hosts? They're....

already on the radio, at least according to this article, and doing quite well, thank you.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2079038/

Howard Stern as the voice of liberal talk radio?

It's the end of civilization as we know it.

I'm trying to imagine how Fisher could be more wrong than he was in this article, and failing miserably. STUNNINGLY full of shit.

I agree with one premise: if it were possible to make $$$ (i.e. ratings) off some liberal version of Limbaugh, somebody would already be doing it. But the fact that listeners to Stern, Don & Mike, Opie & Anthony [RIP], and their ilk are more liberal than those who listen to Limbaugh is, as one of my physics teachers used to say, "true but irrelevant."

Except that I was a diehard O&A fan, and both Opie, Anthony, most of their staff and 95% of the callers openly called for the paving of Iraq (and most of the rest of the Middle East) at the slightest provocation. Any callers to the left of Donald Rumsfeld on this issue were consistently mocked, lampooned and shouted off the air.

Except that Stern is just as aggressive in his desire for war, though at least he's an _admitted_ chickenhawk, and has stated that he'd be against war in a heartbeat if he was among those sent to fight.

Except that I'd LOVE to see someone try to describe Imus and his audience as "left-leaning."

Except... wait, you mean people actually LISTEN to Don & Mike?

Except that comparing a show that's 95% conservative political commentary and potshots at leftists (Limbaugh's) to a show that's 95% hookers, lesbians, anal sex jokes, racial and ethnic humor, human oddities and potshots at internal staff members (Stern's -- and that's when he's having a good day) is apples-to-oranges to the millionth degree.

Hell, Limbaugh's a moderate compared to the likes of Hannity, Bob Grant or Michael Savage, and that's saying quite a bit.

This kind of parallels the discussion of liberal radio talk show hosts ...

The ratings are out, and Donahue's in the tank.

CABLE NEWS RACE
MON., FEB. 24, 2003

O'REILLY 2.7 [RATING]
HANNITY/COLMES 1.8
SHEP SMITH 1.6
GRETA 1.5
BRIT HUME 1.5
LARRY KING 1.1
CHUNG 0.9
AARON BROWN 0.9
CROSSIFRE 0.7
HARDBALL 0.4
DONAHUE 0.4

Yahoo News Story on Donahue's Firing. He's not even finishing out the week ... they're going to show reruns through Friday.

I wonder if this means that MS-NBC will go crawling back to Alan Keyes (who maintained good ratings on his Alan Keyes is Making Sense Panel/Talk program.)

I found this funny:

Aaron Brown is excellent and so is Hardball. People just don't want real news right now, they want jingoistic stuff they can rah-rah around. O'Reilly is the king of it, dismissing real debate so he can push buttons. Watching it is like eating junk food -- nothing wrong with the occasional sweet, but don't eat it for lunch and dinner or you'll ruin your health.

Also, the market for this stuff swings old, which might be the key to it all really. Nobody under 60 watches Larry King.

Originally posted by wolf
I wonder if this means that MS-NBC will go crawling back to Alan Keyes (who maintained good ratings on his Alan Keyes is Making Sense Panel/Talk program.)

I doubt it. Jesse Ventura's new show is supposed to debut in March, so I'm sensing it will move into that spot.

I didn't mind Keyes's show...the only thing that really irritates me about him (other than being Republican) is that he sounds like Kermit the Frog.

I watched Donahue the first two months he was on. I admire his passion and actually enjoyed the show...but he was going up against heavyweights.

My rationale for talk radio/television being more popular among conservatives is as follows: From what I understand, Republicans/conservatives tend to be better educated than Dems/liberals. And it seems like they are willing to talk more about the issues (even if they're slanting the shit out of them) on a serious level. And if you're more educated, you tend to make more money, so you'll watch the cable shows, listen to the radio, and buy the book and the neat merchandise on their websites.

The closest thing the liberals have to someone like O'Reilly or Limbaugh is Al Franken.

O&A, Stern, etc...Infinity is trying to cash in on their brashness. O&A paid the price for their stupidity (again), though they did have some gems in there. I dunno...I realize that there is a market for those kinds of folks, but I guess I'm not part of that market. I find them funny sometimes, but not a lot.

I love Hardball, though I wish they would have kept it at 7pm. I love watching Chris Matthews pick apart folks on both sides of the aisle.

Originally posted by sycamore
I didn't mind Keyes's show...the only thing that really irritates me about him (other than being Republican) is that he sounds like Kermit the Frog.

Funny Syc, I never noticed that. I agree though now that you mention it.

Originally posted by same From what I understand, Republicans/conservatives tend to be better educated than Dems/liberals.

*That* is a new one on me. Glad you think so though. :D

I heard, unconfirmed, that Michael Savage is getting a show on MS-NBC ... he might be up for Donahue's time slot. It will be interesting to see if it goes to him or Jesse Ventura, or if they'll have a steel cage match to determine who gets prime time.

What about Jon Stewart? He mocks both sides of the Iraq thing with equal vigor, but he seems to personally not be terribly conservative.

Granted, he's not really "talk", and isn't really "radio".

Originally posted by Skunks
What about Jon Stewart? He mocks both sides of the Iraq thing with equal vigor, but he seems to personally not be terribly conservative.

Granted, he's not really "talk", and isn't really "radio".

Among liberal circles, Stewart has risen to demigod status for his consistent mocking of the hard right's inanities, when few others are doing it.

Bill Maher has his moments, but he also had a lengthy We Now Pause For Fear of Sponsor Retaliation break between shows. Maher also grants Ann Coulter a small amount of credibility when she's on as a guest, whereas Stewart treats her like a visitor from the Planet Mongo who is genetically incapable of grasping basic concepts. I prefer the latter approach.

I like Bill Maher from time to time, but he's taken to treating every issue with a heavy dose of righteous indignation which I find incompatible with comedy. You can't be mad and laugh. Michael Moore does the same thing. Both of them sometimes come across as bitter and resentful.

Jon Stewart doesn't do that; he's more humble. Maher and Moore's approach is that they have all the answers. Stewart is more like the confused skeptic, the little guy who wonders why common sense doesn't seem to apply.

Which is why the Daily Show is one of the best things on TV nowadays.

I need to get a PVR just so I can watch that show.

tvspy.com is reporting that GLAAD is trying to kill Michael Savage's show on MSNBC before it starts.

(The report is about halfway down the page in "shoptalk" below the CNN Japan article)

I've never heard of the guy until now, so I'm willing to give him a fair shake. Hell, I'm sure there are a ton of people that didn't care for Donahue (which is now obvious).

The interesting thing about Savage (I listen to him occasionally on webcasts of his drivetime KSFO radio show) is that he's not strongly conservative or liberal ... he just talks about stuff, and is quite up front about how what he says is his opinion and he's not guided by any particular party or ideology.