Having worked in left, center, and right leaning talk, on local and national levels, I can confirm - left-leaning talk on a corporate level was throttled & killed. It wasn't unsuccessful because it was of poor quality - it wasn't given a chance to succeed, on purpose, by the right-wingers in the C-Suites who stifled & killed it.
The right's version of "balance" when it comes to speech is that everyone else should be forced to listen to them, while no one who disagrees with them should be able to have any kind of significantly successful megaphone.
And because it's almost exclusively right-wing corporatists (nee fascists) who control the big legacy media platforms, they've shut out other perspectives. That Bezos has done it so blatantly in the open surprises some folks, but for those of us who've been screaming about this problem for over a quarter century, it's just another example.
There are many reasons left-leaning media behemoths are slow to rise, including all kinds of laws, rules, and norms instituted by those same right-wing monsters over the last 30 years, designed to pull the ladder up behind them, ensuring any competition would find a MUCH more difficult time gaining size & reach, including other platforms that share their same ideology.
If we remove the many, many millions from outside sources like Russia, who do not have the best interests in mind of the U.S., the right-wing podcast world would be significantly smaller. Likewise, the only really successful right-wing TV propaganda channel is the Fox Propaganda Network (no, they're not news).
Right wing talk radio is still effectively dominated by Premiere Radio, who was Limbaugh's syndicator.
The myth of the successes of right-wing talk are a mountain. The reality is that it's not actually that popular. But right-wing corporatists have made sure the traditional media market will support little else - yet another reason the alternative media market is growing so fast.
My theory about the failure of left talk radio is that the right and left want different things. The right needs constant reaffirmation that they are right and the left is evil. Those on the left are more self-confident and don't need a left version of right style radio. They want facts, entertainment, and diversion. As it happens, there is a radio outlet that does that perfectly--NPR. I think the success of NPR is a key reason why commercial left radio failed.
It occurs to me that right-wing talk radio works by constantly reaffirming right-wing beliefs for the same reason churches have services every week. The world and reality are constantly at war with the right and the deeply religious because it doesn’t conform to their beliefs. They need Rush Limbaugh and evangelical preachers to constantly explain away the deviations between conservative beliefs and reality. Thus they both serve the same function.
I think you miss an important point- that right wing money bought up many independent radio stations. Setting aside what they did to news content, look at the culture war waged against the music of the 60s and 70s. On the radio the most popular songs of Dylan, Baez, Beatles, Rolling Stones, Jefferson Airplane, etc. etc. etc. have disappeared almost as completely as Hayek's works have in North Korea. DJs are told by HQ what music to play - central planning in the arts. Then add the sociopathic ravings of right wing propaganda.
It's a part, for sure. NPR began to move the direction it has because the right shoved out all left-leaning talk from the commercial dial.
Since NPR's mandate is to create a more informed public by producing and distributing journalism, cultural, and educational programming that fosters a deeper understanding of events, ideas, and cultures, they effectively took over much of that space.
That said, there's a LOT more space on the Left to be filled, simply because the Left is so diverse. And if/when the Right ever has their chokehold broken, the Left will be able to make a lot more money, because there are markets there, as the large & varied podcast market of the Left proves.
For now though, especially among legacy media, you're not wrong that NPR fills some of that space, so long as they hold to their mandate.
Throughout the 1980s and 90s, I complained about the liberal bias of the news media. And then the Fox network came along. Instead of improving political discourse, Fox decided to appeal to the stupidest people in America. Only lawsuits got Fox to back away (slightly) from broadcasting enormous lies. I can only conclude that there are not enough intelligent conservatives in the U.S. that can support a reputable conservative news media. (Yes, there's the Wall Street Journal, but even there, the best reporting seems to be done by liberals or centrists, while conservatives merely spout their opinions on the op-ed page.)
Thank you. I look forward to reading the rest of the book.
It seems to me Jefferson begged the question. It's not clear to me what we want journalism writ large to do. Entertainment? Weather reports? Mold opinion? More or less factual information? For what purposes? Intellectual stimulation? Local & state govt have more impact on day-to-day life than whatever happens in WDC. Clearly, there's no money in covering it. Having wasted several years of my youth in MI, I can tell you that knowing what information is more or less factual & acquiring it is harder than most folks think. It wasn't that long ago that Face Book was a pretty good source of the information I found useful; at the moment, Substack seems to be.
Having worked in left, center, and right leaning talk, on local and national levels, I can confirm - left-leaning talk on a corporate level was throttled & killed. It wasn't unsuccessful because it was of poor quality - it wasn't given a chance to succeed, on purpose, by the right-wingers in the C-Suites who stifled & killed it.
The right's version of "balance" when it comes to speech is that everyone else should be forced to listen to them, while no one who disagrees with them should be able to have any kind of significantly successful megaphone.
And because it's almost exclusively right-wing corporatists (nee fascists) who control the big legacy media platforms, they've shut out other perspectives. That Bezos has done it so blatantly in the open surprises some folks, but for those of us who've been screaming about this problem for over a quarter century, it's just another example.
There are many reasons left-leaning media behemoths are slow to rise, including all kinds of laws, rules, and norms instituted by those same right-wing monsters over the last 30 years, designed to pull the ladder up behind them, ensuring any competition would find a MUCH more difficult time gaining size & reach, including other platforms that share their same ideology.
If we remove the many, many millions from outside sources like Russia, who do not have the best interests in mind of the U.S., the right-wing podcast world would be significantly smaller. Likewise, the only really successful right-wing TV propaganda channel is the Fox Propaganda Network (no, they're not news).
Right wing talk radio is still effectively dominated by Premiere Radio, who was Limbaugh's syndicator.
The myth of the successes of right-wing talk are a mountain. The reality is that it's not actually that popular. But right-wing corporatists have made sure the traditional media market will support little else - yet another reason the alternative media market is growing so fast.
Because people are tired of the lies and BS.
My theory about the failure of left talk radio is that the right and left want different things. The right needs constant reaffirmation that they are right and the left is evil. Those on the left are more self-confident and don't need a left version of right style radio. They want facts, entertainment, and diversion. As it happens, there is a radio outlet that does that perfectly--NPR. I think the success of NPR is a key reason why commercial left radio failed.
It occurs to me that right-wing talk radio works by constantly reaffirming right-wing beliefs for the same reason churches have services every week. The world and reality are constantly at war with the right and the deeply religious because it doesn’t conform to their beliefs. They need Rush Limbaugh and evangelical preachers to constantly explain away the deviations between conservative beliefs and reality. Thus they both serve the same function.
I think you miss an important point- that right wing money bought up many independent radio stations. Setting aside what they did to news content, look at the culture war waged against the music of the 60s and 70s. On the radio the most popular songs of Dylan, Baez, Beatles, Rolling Stones, Jefferson Airplane, etc. etc. etc. have disappeared almost as completely as Hayek's works have in North Korea. DJs are told by HQ what music to play - central planning in the arts. Then add the sociopathic ravings of right wing propaganda.
It's a part, for sure. NPR began to move the direction it has because the right shoved out all left-leaning talk from the commercial dial.
Since NPR's mandate is to create a more informed public by producing and distributing journalism, cultural, and educational programming that fosters a deeper understanding of events, ideas, and cultures, they effectively took over much of that space.
That said, there's a LOT more space on the Left to be filled, simply because the Left is so diverse. And if/when the Right ever has their chokehold broken, the Left will be able to make a lot more money, because there are markets there, as the large & varied podcast market of the Left proves.
For now though, especially among legacy media, you're not wrong that NPR fills some of that space, so long as they hold to their mandate.
Throughout the 1980s and 90s, I complained about the liberal bias of the news media. And then the Fox network came along. Instead of improving political discourse, Fox decided to appeal to the stupidest people in America. Only lawsuits got Fox to back away (slightly) from broadcasting enormous lies. I can only conclude that there are not enough intelligent conservatives in the U.S. that can support a reputable conservative news media. (Yes, there's the Wall Street Journal, but even there, the best reporting seems to be done by liberals or centrists, while conservatives merely spout their opinions on the op-ed page.)
Thank you. I look forward to reading the rest of the book.
It seems to me Jefferson begged the question. It's not clear to me what we want journalism writ large to do. Entertainment? Weather reports? Mold opinion? More or less factual information? For what purposes? Intellectual stimulation? Local & state govt have more impact on day-to-day life than whatever happens in WDC. Clearly, there's no money in covering it. Having wasted several years of my youth in MI, I can tell you that knowing what information is more or less factual & acquiring it is harder than most folks think. It wasn't that long ago that Face Book was a pretty good source of the information I found useful; at the moment, Substack seems to be.
BM (before Musk), Twitter was a very good source of news. Now I just use it to market my Substack posts. I never used Facebook for news.
You're right! I meant Twitter, not Face Book. Thank you!