Air America
I’m listening to the Air America radio network right now, and it’s alright. Not that I’m against what they’re doing, but I’m just not a big fan of the format. It all just seems a little shticky and devoid of information or insight. I’ll keep listening for the rest of the week to see if it grows on me (and avoid the current NPR fund drive), but for now, I think I’ll stick to public radio.
Update : Here’s a list of stations if you’d like to listen in (via Atrios et. al.)
There’s also this feed, but I’m not aware of its source. Also, if you tune into AM 1580 in Los Angeles, you’ll hear a bunch of mariachi music, so I think there’s a mistake in the program listing.
27 comments
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
it didn’t make it on the air on AM1580 in LA until around 11 am. i’ve been listening to it. it’s alright so far.
Comment by tom — March 31, 2004 @ 12:22 pm
i was just listening to 1580 in irvine and got the signal fine. i think irvine might have spanish language filters in the air.
anyway, if air america isnt exiting anyone, and the fund drive is boring you, may i suggest 90.7 kpfk fm, listener sponsored community radio for southern california.
i only listened to franken for about a half hour, but i can see i’m gonna have format issues as well. one of the things that drives me crazy about shows like limbaugh is they screen their calls to the point where if anyone with an opposing opinion gets through, they are so bad at articulating rush rips him to shreds. i only heard a few calls, but it looks like they are so far employing a “frankenheads-only” rule on the o’franken factor.
i’ll listen to garafalo’s show tonight, but mostly for curiosity’s sake. i thought she was one of the less articulate celebs on the anti-war side in the runup to bombing last year.
why cant we get tim robbins a 3 hour daily show?
Comment by josh — March 31, 2004 @ 12:23 pm
So far my problem with Air America is the problem I have with Pacifica. Both are so far to the left that they’re as interested in attacking the right as they are with informing the public. Granted, I’m glad there’s somebody out there fighting back, but style-wise I’d rather just listen to straight news and get outraged on my own.
Comment by greg — March 31, 2004 @ 12:40 pm
“i’ll listen to garafalo’s show tonight, but mostly for curiosity’s sake. i thought she was one of the less articulate celebs on the anti-war side in the runup to bombing last year.
”
did you see her on crossfire? she co-hosted for a wekk… the first day she fumbled a lot, but the rest of the week she kicked tucker’s ass.
also, i met her at the moveon awards thing… while waiting to talk to her she was talking to some reporter for about 15 minutes about air america and other issues… she seemed pretty damn articulate to me. i think since the war, she’s really found her voice. kinda like how aaron mcgruder found his voice after 9-11. i like garafalo as a comedian, but i like her more as a political commentor.
franken kind of annoys me. he always seems like he’s mainly interested in himself, and the issues are secondary. but at least he’s got a co-host who seems to pull his reigns occasionally.
greg- on your point with KPFK and AIR- i think you jump to your conclusions before giving them enough time. i agree i like to get real news and form my own opinions, but i refuse to write off an entire station based on one show, or one morning of listening. there’s a lot of shows i hate on KPFK, but there are a couple that are really good, and i for that i support them. i’m the same way with NPR. i’ll probably be the same way with AIR, but i’ll reserve my judgement till i’ve listened to it a lot more.
Comment by tom — March 31, 2004 @ 3:11 pm
ummm… the los angeles link above is for korean radio. surely you must like pacifica better than that.
Comment by josh — March 31, 2004 @ 3:22 pm
okay, i’m listening to this Randi Rhodes chick now, and i have to say i hate her show. i just listened to her YELL at ralph nader for 15 minutes. to which he replied (trying to be calm) “this is no way to interview someone.” to which she replied “I’M NOT INTEVIEWING YOU! I’MM MAD AT YOU! DO’NT TELL ME HOW TO DO RADIO I’VE BEEN DOING IT FOR 20 YEARS!!!”
i know i said something about judging a show too quickly above, but i do’nt think i’ll be bothering myself with the randi rhodes show anymore.
Comment by tom — March 31, 2004 @ 4:00 pm
You beat me to the punch, Tom. The whole time I was thinking “Get a grip, lady”. I can’t believe she’s getting four hours per day. One-sided bluster is boring, regardless of whose side it is.
That, and I thought Franken’s continuing sketches about Ann Coulter locked in a closet were just dumb.
I’m glad that something like this exists, since it’ll probably help fire up liberals enough to actually fight for what they believe in for a change, but so far I’ve been unimpressed.
Every time I’ve tuned into KPFK, it’s either been music I don’t like or a show hosted by somebody who has a clear agenda. Once again, I’m glad it exists, but it just ain’t my cup of tea.
Comment by greg — March 31, 2004 @ 4:13 pm
yeah, i agree… it was infuriating that i agreed with her rants, but i couldn’t stand to listen to her. i look forward to janeane’s show. i hope it’s better. i wish they’d put her on in the randi rhodes slot and move randi to the graveyard shift.
i agree, ther’es some annoying crap on KPFK- especially the world music shows. but i really like Democracy Now and a couple of other shows that i do’nt know the names of.
but i can say the same thing about any NPR station. i only like about 2 or 3 shows on NPR, too. the rest of it just bores/annoys the crap out of me.
Comment by tom — March 31, 2004 @ 5:21 pm
They aren’t very good yet. I listened to it for part of the day, and I agree it was disapointing. But not becuse it was too far to the left, and not because the format is inherently vacuous and blustery.
THEY suck. Franken’s show especially.
It was the first day, I’ll give them a month, but they gotta get their shit together. Something a lot of people haven’t noticed about Al Franken, but you and Tom seem to get: he’s goes off on wierd tangents and thinks he’s funnier than he is. When in fact a lot of his humor is strange, and apolitical in a bad way. The Coulter joke was awful, for instance.
It is rare for a talk radio format to go live across the country without, you know, six months of practice in a smaller market. Hopefully they will learn quickly.
The only hopeful sign is that they are in it for the long hall. I’ll listen when I can, and now that there’s a station in Portland maybe I can get a job there.
Josh, my community radio station is also doing pledge week(s) right now. 90.7,
www.KBOO.org.
Comment by JoeW — March 31, 2004 @ 6:24 pm
I have the same problem with liberal talk radio that I have with conservative talk radio. 1) It’s boring and 2) it’s on AM! The reason conservative talk radio was able to take off was that their listeners already were on AM for sports and oldies. I’m not switching from clear and distinct FM Radio with NPR to the muddy sound of AM, where I can find WLIB nestled between sportstalk and mariachi music.
I know these guys are new and need time, but I think that they have completely misread the way to build an audience. I may ultimately be proven wrong, but how many people will actually switch from FM to tune in on a daily basis to hear Al Franken?
Is there really a market for Air
America? Are there really that many people out there who feel CNN, NPR, and the New York Times are ignoring the left?
Comment by E-Rock — March 31, 2004 @ 6:46 pm
Yes. If you think CNN, NPR, and the NY Times represent the left, then you’re nuts. It may seem that way, but that’s just because there’s nothing on the left that can compete with the partisan rancor of Fox News and talk radio.
Comment by greg — March 31, 2004 @ 7:55 pm
It’s my own fault. I tend to equate conservatives with reactionaries but not liberals with radicals (there’s nothing wrong with a little radicalism, by the way), which, in turn, is because I equate moderate liberalism with the mainstream.
Do you think that liberal talk radio will reach the same kind of audience, in terms of numbers, as conservative talk radio?
Comment by E-Rock — March 31, 2004 @ 8:53 pm
you know- something i didn’t think of earlier… and another rebuttle to greg’s point:
“Both are so far to the left that they’re as interested in attacking the right as they are with informing the public.”
i don’t know where you heard anything on the far left today… i listened through most of the afternoon (until i had to turn off randi rhodes for a while) and all i heard was radical democratic views. in fact- all afternoon randi rhodes was hanging up on callers who were telling her that she’s not leftist enough- randi was arguing in favor of mainstream democrats, adn all these greener, lefter liberals were calling in and voicing their disapointment with that. the o’ franken factor had a whole hour devoted to Michael Moore apologizing for supporting Nader in 2000. Al Gore called in his support. etc, etc, etc… i didn’t hear anything that was radically leftist. was it more left of mainstream news like NPR or CNN? yes. but compared to some of the stuff i’ve heard on Pacifica, it sounds more like hard-core centrist political views to me. or hard-core democrat (which is pretty much where i’d categorize the talent show as well).
anyway.. it has it’s problems, but we need to help them out with that. i plan to listen to it as mmuch as possible for the first few weeks, and then start writing some letters to let them know my opinions. we should all do that. this radio station is an important thing that needs to survive. we can help to mold it into something better than it is. instead of complaining and criticizing it in comments and on blogs, we need to write constructively critical letters to Air America to let them know how to make it better. i wish i could go back in time and do the same thing to organizations like PeTA, which i am a reluctant supporter of because i think it’s run by idiots, but they’ve been going on for so long that there’s no way to change them now. but we have that opportunity with Air America because we’re all paying attention to the beginning stages and we can help to mold it.
anyway… we should work hard to make this a great station by supporting them and writing to them to make them the best radio station out there.
Comment by tom — March 31, 2004 @ 11:25 pm
thank you, tom. i was concerned beforehand that this would be less a progressive station and more a democratic party flagship station. conservative radio isnt really conservative but is rather just another media apologist for the republican party, and i was scared this station would be less progressive, more apologist for democrats. we need reporting that talks about exactly how much clinton knew about rwanda and what he did to activly stall the international community’s response (thank you amy goodman). you will not find this on air america. but, i guess i’ll just accept it for what it is. i’d rather listen to that than say the world music shows on kpfk.
another thing-did i read you right? pacifica has an agenda but not npr? i’m not debating pacifica doesnt have an agenda, but npr is clean? greg, your smart posts and that extremely nieve statement are incongruous.
“portions of npr are brought to you by wal-mart… adm… monsanto… pfizer… some company (i cant remember the name but i do remember the horror when in the 10 second plug it was described as)offering business real on and offshore outsourcing oppertunities and solutions.”
there may be more of an agenda in npr than what you think. mabey not in what they report but in what they don’t. agenda aside, many of the stories i hear npr pick up and underreport are broken first by and coverd far more in depth by pacifica. agenda? sure. EVERYONE’S got an agenda, greg.
Comment by josh — April 1, 2004 @ 8:19 am
Okay, maybe I didn’t make myself clear. My problem so far has been that they’re more interested in attacking than informing. I’m glad there’s somebody out there doing it, but I don’t find it that entertaining. I didn’t mean to imply that my problem was with their politics (I don’t think I heard anything that I disagreed with), but rather the attitude of the programming.
But my problem is the format, so the only suggestions I’d have is to make the shows more like Crossfire and less like Limbaugh. I’m obviosuly outnumbered here (which is probably a good thing), so I’d rather let people who plan to listen to it a lot help mold it than some pissy blogger who probably won’t listen that much anyways.
From what I’ve heard so far, my favorite show has been the one they cram between Randi Rhodes and Janeane Garofalo, but mostly because it’s more of a news-magazine format than just talking heads and interviews. I liked the guests that Garofalo and Franken got, but I’m sure that’s just because it’s the first day. I’m interested to see how all the shows will be doing in a couple weeks.
I also hope the whole “rant about how the media mistreats liberals” theme among the shows was just because it was the first day. I fear it isn’t, since treating your audience like it’s an oppressed minority seems to be a staple of the talk radio format (at least on the conservative side).
By your standards everything that is sponsored has an agenda, whether it’s NPR, CNN, or the latest episode of Friends. I never said NPR is perfect, but they’re, on the whole, as close to “fair and balanced” as you’re gonna find on the radio. Unlike what I’ve heard on AirAm. or KPFK, the coverage and tone of NPR programming doesn’t leave me with the feeling that I’m being lectured.
Comment by greg — April 1, 2004 @ 9:45 am
“But my problem is the format, so the only suggestions I’d have is to make the shows more like Crossfire and less like Limbaugh. I’m obviosuly outnumbered here (which is probably a good thing), so I’d rather let people who plan to listen to it a lot help mold it than some pissy blogger who probably won’t listen that much anyways.”
that’s exactly how i feel- the problem isn’t with the intent, it’s with the format. and i think that now is the time to let them know what we want, no matter who you are or how outnumbered you think you are. if you wanna just write pipssy blogs fine, but if enough people write in and tell them “we don’t need 24 hours of talk/call-in format- give us some news shows. give us some balance. etc. etc…” then we might be able to mold it into the statino that we hoped for.
my hope right now is that eventually we’ll have one of these call-in format talk-shows per day, and the programming will expand in general- that way we may have all franken on monday, randi rhodes on tuesday, janeane on wednesday, etc… but that’s only going to happen if they continue to get the support they need. and listening to it for a week before changing the dial isn’t going to help.
maybe i’m being too optimistic that we have an opinion or a chance to make a difference with this station, but i can’t remember the last time i witnessed the beginning of something that could potentially be as important as this station. and i’d rather write a couple of letters than throw my hands in the air in apathy sayin “they have an agenda so i give up.” i think that’s pathetic. i’ve been looking forward to this station for too long to just give up and turn the dial. maybe my efforts will fall on deaf ears, but it’s worth my time to write a few letters . and the reason i urge someone like you, greg, to do the same is that i think you’re much better at it than me.
we should all try to make this the best station it can be. i seriously doubt that you’re in the minoority with your opinions.
Comment by tom — April 1, 2004 @ 10:40 am
Considering all the prise I’ve been reading of the programming so far, I actually think I am in the minority here, which is overall a good thing.
As much as I’d rather them have a more balanced programming, I think it’s a big mistake for Air America to do it. The biggest problem that many liberal media outlets have is that they try to appear balanced and end up neutering themselves. Salon.com is a good example of this.
Air America is great because it’s the first time I can remember where a big group of liberals are fighting back with the same tactics that conservatives have been using. for once, they’re pissed off and unafraid to show it. That’s awesome and it’s gonna end up really motivating a lot of people on our side.
But it ain’t my thing (for the most part), and I’m fine with that. I really don’t want to influence it because I’m sure any suggestions from me would just water down what they’re doing.
Comment by greg — April 1, 2004 @ 10:56 am
my first letter will reflect that although i didnt hear firsthand, many listeners ofthe randi show have told me about the bashing of lefties on her show last night, and suggest the better targets as the republicans.
Comment by josh — April 1, 2004 @ 11:01 am
yeah randii spent most of her time bashing Nader (which he deserves- but not in that format where he isn’t given a chance to voice his opinions) and then she spent the rest of the time hanging up on the more leftist leaning callers.
my first letter will probably be about how they should move her show to the late-night slot and give janeane’s show the afternoon slot.
greg- i see your point. and i do’nt think that the station should become so balanced that it’s no longer liberal media, but if you have the opinion that there are some formatting problems, then i think you should let ethm know.
Comment by tom — April 1, 2004 @ 11:10 am
Okay, this is paranoid bullshit. Just because npr accepts underwriting from corporations doesn’t make them biased. I don’t know if you remember the half-hour “This American Life” did on ADM’s successful plot to fix the price of Lysine, but that’s an example of public radio reporting on itself. Not the only one.
As Greg said, it sounds like you only really trust broadcasting that’s not underwritten by anyone, and if that’s the case I’m sorry to hear that, as there’s pretty much no such thing. I don’t know a lot of journalists willing to work for free, though most of them work for public radio, it’s worth noting. Why you’d take a job a news organization known for not paying much, yet still have your news judgement swayed by a corporation that’s not a guarantor of your employment and is not the only underwriter the network has, is beyond me. I think you’re being pretty grossly reductive about a profession I’m fairly certain you don’t know a damn thing about.
Especially the people beaming those messages to your dental fillings, Dale. I don’t mean to be overly harsh, but you’re being cynical to a fault in your assessment of NPR and the agenda you perceive. What, exactly, is NPR’s agenda? To make its underwriters look good? To cover up stories about its underwriters? To not report on its underwriters? Go to NPR.org and do a keyword search on “Wal-Mart.” You’ll find plenty of stories, none of which seem to be puff pieces (save for the most recent one on Wal-Mart’s CEO), and a lot of them aren’t particularly favorable. Reportage doesn’t have to be a hatchet job in order to be fair or unbiased — if you’re looking for hatchet pieces, I hear FOX isn’t a bad source.
Comment by megalodon — April 1, 2004 @ 12:34 pm
I forgot to mention Air America. I think I’d rather watch the movie for two hours than listen to the network. Franken’s show was okay, not great, and the guy on after him was just an idiot. I hate the same things about AA that I hate about all commercial radio: The commercials. Not just that, though: The whole thing just had this sort of lowest-common-denominator “Breakfast Club Zoo” aesthetic to it that I haven’t liked since I used to listen to Z104.5, back when it was Z104.5.
I agree with Greg: I’m glad it’s there, because it gives morons like O’Reilly their own medicine. But I still don’t have too much interest in it (though I haven’t heard the rest of the schedule yet). Plus the AM thing makes a big difference too. Though I guess it’s largely moot, since I’m listening online anyway.
Comment by Brianotron — April 1, 2004 @ 12:53 pm
Things that have already gotten old :
Comment by greg — April 1, 2004 @ 5:04 pm
“That commercial for the movie that “Hollywood is afraid to make” made by people who “unlike Mel Gibson, don’t have millions of dollars”. ”
i didn’t realize it, but i have a friend who’s working on that movie… the ad is totally lame.
i hate randi rhodes even more today.
Comment by tom — April 1, 2004 @ 5:15 pm
What a joke. Do you people honestly listen to this garbage radio? Whatever, when the ratings come in, Franken will have to change his shorts. He’ll shit his pants when he sees how pathetic he is.
Comment by Mumakata — April 2, 2004 @ 11:58 am
I’ve been listening to Randi Rhodes every day, and folowing the comments in this thread, and after giving it some thought, here’s my take. (And I know this is probably going to come off snobby or elitist, but I truly don’t mean it that way.)
There are alot of intellectual liberals out there… BUT, not all liberals are intellectuals… And, the intellectuals will continue to get their news from sources like NPR, Pacifica, the Nation, etc… However, the masses really can’t stand NPR. Boring intellectual talk radio. After listening to all the callers who say they LOVE Randi Rhodes’ show, I’m convinced that this format really does appeal to the masses. And after all, aren’t these the people who we really need to get the information out to? I’ve heard plenty of intellectuals calling in to correct her on some point or bring up some important detail, but you know what? These people don’t need Air America, they’re already getting their information elsewhere. But, for the masses, who aren’t going to listen to NPR, a little information may just slip in there with all the Morning Zoo type shenanigans. I say, whatever Air America needs to do to appeal to the masses, more power to ‘em. And those of us who prefer a more straight forward news type format will continue to go to our same sources.
Comment by mona — April 2, 2004 @ 7:01 pm
Please remember this come June or July…..
Randi Rhodes is the secret weapon for Air America and by the middle of summer you will understand why…..Randi Rhodes is Air America’s biggest star believe it or not…mark my words ladies and gentlemen, she will single handedly change the course of the November election and she too will be a household name. You will probably see her on the major cable news shows more and more in the future prior to the election. You will see that by the middle of the summer her ratings in the Air America cities will rival Mr. Limbaugh and then by October her ratings will surpass him as they did in Mr. Limbaughs home city of Palm Beach Fl. where she literally crushes him continually. Mark My Words Ladies and Gents
Comment by Kevin — April 10, 2004 @ 10:06 pm
The Randi Rhodes show is definitely the moat annoying piece of tripe in existence. She is the female version of Rush Limbaugh. Her self-righteousness causes a gutteral welling of bile deep within my gullet. I feel the need to vomit at the mere intention of her name. I unfortunately work the grave shift and have no idea when she is comming on. When I hear that “Bounce Your Boobies” theme it’s like name that tune. I turn off the radio in 3 notes or less.
Of the times I actually listened to the show she talked about herself for the bulk of the segments. I am certain you will hear her reference herself at leat 300 times a minute. She is rude in her constant interruption of every caller, interviwee and probably every individual she comes in contact with. I am awaiting a response to an open letter I wrote to her expressing my angst toward her. We will see if she has the professionalism to respond.
db
Comment by db — September 5, 2004 @ 3:16 am