Airwave Envy II

Liberals are such crybabies. (By the grace of God, I’m no longer a liberal. No more tears!)

They’re still whining about the domination of conservative talk radio. The Center for American Progress and Free Press, liberal “think” tanks, put out a joint 40-page report titled, Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio (PDF). They outline the “problem” and propose solutions that wouldn’t surprise even the most politically apathetic American.

The Numbers

Liberals are hopeless. On the one hand, they seem to hate concepts like “business” and “market.” On the other, they have no problem taking advantage of the jobs and capital created by businesses or the opportunities created by a particular market. In fact, they want to piggyback off the success of conservative talk radio.

The researchers found that 91 percent of weekday talk radio programming is conservative and only 9 percent is liberal (they use the word progressive; I won’t). Every weekday, people who want to listen to conservative radio can enjoy 2,570 hours (and 15 minutes!) of it. Liberals who listen to liberal radio have to settle for only 254 hours. But that’s what the market demands, right? Not necessarily so, say the libs. I’ll get to that later.

The tanks say that 76 percent of the programming in the top 10 radio markets is conservative. “While progressive talk is making inroads on commercial stations, conservative talk continues to be pushed out over the airwaves in greater multiples of hours than progressive talk is broadcast,” cried the researchers.

Why does conservative talk dominate the airwaves? I (and many other conservatives and a few honest liberals) believe that conservative talk dominates the airwaves because of de-regulation of the airwaves in the 1980s and because there’s a bigger market for conservative talk. But the think tanks believe these explanations are inadequate. Not wrong, mind you, but inadequate.

The Problem as Liberals See it

First, the researchers inform us that the Fairness Doctrine was never repealed. “The FCC did announce in 1987 that it would no longer enforce certain regulations under the umbrella of the Fairness Doctrine, and in 1989 a circuit court upheld the FCC decision. The Supreme Court, however, has never overruled the cases that authorized the FCC’s enforcement of the Fairness Doctrine.”

Besides, the libs say, the Fairness Doctrine alone isn’t enough to ensure “fair discussion.” But more government regulations and red tape might. I’ll elaborate on this when I get to “The Solution.”

Second, the researchers say the market argument is “misleading.” Although talk radio listeners tend to be middle-aged conservative men, about 43 percent of regular listeners call themselves conservative, 23 liberal, and 30 moderate.

See? Talk radio show listeners are not monolithic! The researchers practically shout this very important message. But there’s only one problem. Who claimed that talk radio show listeners were monolithic? No matter. They’re on a roll…

This is where the researchers really begin to whine. They’re upset that station owners broadcast more than one conservative radio talk show in a given market. No fair!

“[I]n Portland, OR, where progressive talk on KPOJ AM 620 competes effectively with conservative talk on KEX AM 1190, station owners also broadcast conservative talk on KXL AM 750 and KPAM AM 860. Although there is a clear demand and proven
success of progressive talk in this market, station owners still elect to stack the
airwaves with one-sided broadcasting.”

It drips with airwave envy, doesn’t it? What does the success of a liberal radio station in a given market have to do with other station owners broadcasting more than one conservative show in the same market? Are the researchers suggesting that there must be an equal number of liberal shows and conservative shows in a single market? Why, yes they are!

If that’s the case, what is stopping liberals from applying for licenses, buying stations, and broadcasting liberal talk radio? (The question is rhetorical.)

When they can’t get what they want through competing with others, what do liberals demand? Government, government, government regulations, entitlements, handouts, preferences, perks… (See If You Can’t Compete, Cheat)

The researchers also found that station licensees tend to broadcast only conservative talk; that is, about 90 percent of the stations they examined broadcast only conservative talk instead of balancing the market with liberal talk. So, what’s to stop liberal licensees from acquiring and airing more liberal talk radio shows? Absolutely nothing. The focus is not on finding a market and developing “progressive” talent; they’re always, always focused on disregarding market demands and demanding that the government limit conservative talk and prop up liberal talk.

The issue for these think tanks is this: if 35 23 percent of talk radio listeners self-identify as liberal, shouldn’t 35 23 percent of the shows feature liberal talk? After all, 43 percent of talk radio show listeners self-identify as conservatives, but 91 percent of the programming is conservative. No fair!

Could the numbers mean that some liberals and moderates are listening to these conservative talk shows, along with conservatives, and like these shows? The researchers never address this possibility.

The researchers say the imbalance is caused by “multiple structural problems in the U.S. regulatory system, particularly the complete breakdown of the public trustee concept of broadcast regulation resulting from pro-forma licensing policies, longer license terms (to eight years from three years previously), the elimination of clear public interest requirements such as local public affairs programming, and the relaxation of ownership rules, including the requirement of local participation in management.”

What follows is a whiny tale about how de-regulation of the airwaves generated competition, which “constrained” local-, black- and women-owned stations. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 removed the limit on how many stations a company could own.

This de-regulation created “artificial economies of scale” for the syndicated programming that “[l]arge, non-local owners” chose to broadcast. The researchers say this business model is profitable, given “the size of corporate radio holdings.”

In plain language, the researchers believe that corporate ownership of radio stations is not serving the needs of the community where the shows are broadcast. Back in the day, they claim, the underlying principles of broadcasting were to “foster localism and a station owner’s commitment to local public service.” After all, if these people had a free license to use the public airwaves, shouldn’t the public be served?

One could argue that the public is being served by the dominance of conservative talk radio. On the other hand, I doubt Rush Limbaugh “fosters localism”; he hosts a national radio show. But in the 21st century digital age, isn’t fostering localism an increasingly outdated concept? And what, I ask again, is preventing local liberal radio stations from forming and broadcasting liberal talk?

Do you see what’s going on? In order to balance out liberal and conservative talk radio, liberals are suggesting we impede progress with more government regulations, in the name of public interest, instead of allowing the market and technology to boldly go where no man has gone before. And they call themselves progressives?

The progressives whine some more about the paucity of black- and female-owned radio stations. Boring, really.

The Solution as Liberals See it

I’ve already alluded to the solution, as liberals see it: More government interference! What else would/could a liberal come up with?

The researchers believe the government should:

Translation: Implement more rules and regs to create artificial markets for liberal talk radio. This is the best scenario for increasing liberal talk radio shows. No matter how the researchers try to couch the facts, there is less demand for liberal talk radio and greater demand for conservative talk radio. That’s as sure as death and taxes.

Translation: The tankers believe a more involved public would result in more liberal talk radio shows. Be careful what you wish for! If such a plan were implemented, it could backfire on liberals. Giving locals more say in federal licensing could result in more conservative talk radio stations.

Translation: Set up an arbitrary and subjective “public interest” requirement (which would favor liberal talk radio stations), and, despite market demands, “balance” out liberal and conservative talk radio shows, whether or not there is a market for liberal talk radio. If owners don’t comply, they’ll be required to pay a fee to…guess who? Why, the left-leaning Corporation for Public Broadcasting, of course!

That’s my assessment of the crybaby-ish report (PDF). But don’t go by me. Read it, analyze it, assess it, laugh at it, and mock it for yourselves…

Bloggers: Michelle Malkin, Think Progress…

Related posts:

• Airwave Envy I
• Failure of Liberal Talk Radio
• Air America Fails to Re-Pay Money Stolen From Poor Black Kids in New York – To File for Bankruptcy?