See you at the MDP Convention

Like many Michigan Democrats, I will be at Cobo Hall in Detroit on Saturday for the Michigan Democratic Party Convention.

For political junkies like me, conventions are a chance to spend a day immersed in politics and see people I campaigned with and for. After the 2008 election, it will also be a celebration and a chance to gear up to take the Michigan Senate back in 2010, keep the governorship and take back the Attorney General’s office and Secretary of State’s office after allowing the Republicans to borrow the traditional Democratic positions for a few years.

The Republicans are also holding their convention at the Lansing Center on both Friday and Saturday. But after their showing in 2008, they are crying in their beer on Michigan Avenue. On Friday their guest speakers were rightwing Republicans radio host Frank Beckmann and Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour. Apparently, Republicans want Michigan to look like Mississippi.

I’ve been in Mississippi: I’ll pass.

Beckmann, get this, is talking about media bias. If anyone should know about media bias he does, and there is none more biased. He is apparently talking about the Fairness Doctrine He is toeing the Republican Party line that the Fairness Doctrine will stifle right-wingers who have an unfair advantage on talk radio. No one can explain how that will happen, but they are making the ridiculous claim that it is censorship.

The fact is the Fairness Doctrine expands the debate and gives more people a voice, not stifling anyone. Also, the President said he will not enforce it.

I’m also excited because my wife is attending with me for the first time. She came over from the dark side to the light; like many Republicans did in November.

I also hope to see some of my fellow liberal bloggers there. Rumor has it that many will be at the Progressive Caucus.

See you there.

If not the Fairness Doctrine then how about some fairness?

If you needed anymore proof of how bankrupt the Republican Party is, you just need to witness the fight over the Fairness Doctrine.

The explosion in right wing talk radio coincided with the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 under Ronald Regan by the Federal Communications Commission. The Fairness Doctrine was formally adopted as an FCC rule in 1949 requiring broadcasters to devote some of their airtime on the public airwaves to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows or editorials, according to Steve Rendall of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR).

There has been some talk of bringing the Fairness Doctrine back to correct the imbalance that has 10 hours of conservative talk for every one hour of liberal talk on the air. Actually, the Fairness Doctrine was never formally repealed. The FCC did announce in 1987 that it would no longer enforce certain regulations under the umbrella of the Fairness Doctrine, and a 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.

The talk of bring back the Fairness Doctrine or actually enforcing it has led right-wingers to go berserk, and they have latched onto the false talking point that it’s a violation of free speech, unconstitutional and it contradicts the foundational principle of free speech and First Amendment rights. There is, of course, no explanation of how the Fairness Doctrine would muzzle any rightwing hatemongers.

How about instead of the Fairness Doctrine how about just some basic fairness? When liberal talk radio, which has been around less than a decade, is allowed to compete head-to-head with rightwing talk it does as well or better.

But how is it fair that the five companies that own all of the radio stations in the country have 600 stations with rightwing programming and only 60 with liberal talk? For an example of the unfairness, consider WJR radio. It has 50,000 watts that can blast its signal all over the state. Hell, I picked up Ernie Harwell doing a Tigers game late one night on the Maryland Shore while driving from Virginia to New York.

WJR is located in a blue state in one of the most liberal cities in that blue state, but there is not one progressive voice on that station. Now, they point to Mitch Albom, but I have never heard Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hanity talk about the new Lions coach. How is it fair that right-wingers can compete on a 50,000 watt powerhouse, but you can’t receive the signal from the liberal talk radio on WDTW 1310 in Detroit at all at night and a weak signal during the day?

Apparently, right-wingers are so concerned that they will actually have to compete fairly that rightwing Congressman Mike Pence and Senator Jim DeMint introduced something called the “Broadcaster Freedom Act” that would prevent the FCC from repromulgating the Fairness Doctrine. It’s kind of like Bush’s Healthy Forest Act or Clean Air Act that does the opposite of what its name implies.

The rightwing echo chamber has swung into full gear, and the rightwing, so-called “American Center for Law and Justice” has a form letter you can copy and send to your federal representative.

Although it was written almost four years ago to the day, the article by Steve Rendall is still relevant on why we need the Fairness Doctrine or some basic fairness.

Instead of being in violation of free speech and being unconstitutional, “citizen groups used the Fairness Doctrine as a tool to expand speech and debate. For instance, it prevented stations from allowing only one side to be heard on ballot measures. Over the years, it had been supported by grassroots groups across the political spectrum, including the ACLU, National Rifle Association and the right-wing Accuracy In Media.”

“The necessity for the Fairness Doctrine, according to proponents, arises from the fact that there are many fewer broadcast licenses than people who would like to have them. Unlike publishing, where the tools of the trade are in more or less endless supply, broadcasting licenses are limited by the finite number of available frequencies. Thus, as trustees of a scarce public resource, licensees accept certain public interest obligations in exchange for the exclusive use of limited public airwaves. One such obligation was the Fairness Doctrine.”

What thing that has led to the glut of rightwing radio in places where it makes absolutely no sense, like WJR, is the consolidation of radio stations. There is very little local radio, and the only way you can tell you are listening to a station in Michigan and one in California is by the commercials.

We just saw what consolidation did to Detroit sports station WDFN when it fired the local hosts in favor of syndicated programs.

That’s why we need more Low Power FM radio stations. These stations are authorized for noncommercial educational broadcasting only, and they operate with an effective radiated power of 100 watts with a range of about 3.5 miles.

The two biggest problems in radio are consolidation and an uneven playing field. This needs to be corrected, and I don’t care how it’s accomplished.

Rightwing WJR declines to carry SOS address in favor of State of Oakland County address

I will be watching Governor Granholm's State of the State address on PBS at 7 p.m. tonight, but if you are not fortunate enough to be close to a TV, try listening to it on NPR.

Amazingly, you will not be able to hear it live on Michigan's most powerful and most rightwing radio station, WJR. The great conservative voice of the Great Lakes is unbelievably carrying the state of the county address of Oakland County Executive and Republican gubernatorial candidate Brooks Patterson. Yes, you heard it right: the most powerful radio station in the state is carrying Patterson's speech on airwaves owned by the public instead of the Governor. Unbelievable. If there ever was a reason for the Fairness Doctrine I can think of no better illustration as this outrage as the reason why.

Even funnier is the station's management reason for it? Get this: Patterson had is hand up first.

It never ceases to amaze me that WJR continues to cling to its rightwing lineup despite broadcasting from a state that has been blue since 1992 and located in one of the most Democratic cities in America. Did they not see the result of the last election?

The have all the national hatemongers on the air, like Rush Windbag, Sean Haity, "Dr." Laura and Mark Levine, and the local line-up is also rightwing. Paul W. Smith subs for Windbag on occasion; I can't believe this guy is from my hometown of Monroe. Bill O'Reily wannabe Frank Beckman was voted one of the most biased reporters, columnists and commentators in Michigan.

But I almost fell out of my chair when I read the headline from Detroit News columnist Neal Rubin: "WJR: No vast right-wing conspiracy." He was correct, however, when he said "WJR-AM (760) leans so far to the right it almost topples over."

Really? If there is no conspiracy then why are there no non-rightwing voices on the station? Rubin falsely claims "Liberal equivalents have historically struggled." That’s' because they are not on as many stations as rightwing tools. When they go head-to-head liberal formats do as well or better.

The likes of Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller, Bill Press, Randi Rhoades and Thom Hartman are very successful, and I will put them up against anyone.

Let's let WJR program director Steve Stewart how insane it is to bump the Governor for the head of just one of Michigan's 83 counties, and while you are at it, also ask him why there is no balance on WJR.

You can call them at (313) 875-4440 or toll free at (800) 859-0957; email them via their web site at http://www.wjr.net/contactus.asp or even snail mail at
News/Talk 760 WJR
3011 West Grand Blvd.
Suite 800
Detroit, MI 48202

Low Power FM radio stations combat talk radio consolidation

In light of a recent report from the Center for American Progress that says conservatives have an unfair stronghold on talk radio and that a few mega corporations control almost all of the public airwaves, coupled with hatemonger Sean Hannity making the ridiculous claim that the Fairness Doctrine is trying to silence him, some proposed federal legislation may bring radio back to the local community where it belongs.

The report stated that because of consolidation five mega media corporations own more than 95 percent of the talk radio stations there is a lack of local input or understanding of the local market, and local ownership - as well as minority ownership - is almost nonexistent. That’s one reason we have almost 100 percent of WJR’s content dominated by conservative programming despite being located in a traditional blue state in one of the most liberal cities in the country.

The answer may be The Local Community Radio Act of 2007 that will free the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to issue more broadcast licenses to Low Power FM radio stations. According to the non-profit Media Access Project, these stations are authorized for noncommercial educational broadcasting only, and the two types operate with an effective radiated power of 100 watts with a range of about 3.5 miles or a 10 watt stations which generally reach an area with a radius of between one and two miles. For a comparison, full power FM radio stations generally operate at between 6,000 and 100,000 watts.

On June 21 bipartisan legislation was introduced in both the House and Senate that would bring hundreds of local, Low Power FM (LPFM) radio stations to cities and suburbs across the country. The Local Community Radio Act (H.R. 2808 and S. 1675) was introduced by U.S. Reps. Mike Doyle, D-Penn., and Lee Terry, R-Neb., and Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Maria Cantwell, D-Wash.

LPFM licenses make owning a radio station possible for churches, schools, labor unions and other community groups, and local talk and genres of music that have disappeared off the airwaves in favor of heavily regimented corporate play lists will return the free airwaves back to the public where it belongs. The Media Access project said since 2000 the FCC has awarded more than 800 LPFM licenses to church groups, schools and civil rights organizations. The bills introduced in June would authorize the FCC to license hundreds -- if not thousands -- of new LPFM stations in cities, towns and suburbs across the country.

I ran across a few examples of low power stations in my life, and they had completely opposite formats. However, they were operating without a license. Hopefully, the new law will make it easier for these kinds of local stations to get a license.

When I worked on the daily newspaper in Lenawee County I got to meet the Rev. Rick Strawcutter, who operated an anti-government pirate radio station in his church in Adrian. This was at the height of the anti-government, militia movement in the mid to early-1990s that, thankfully, died away following the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. The other was here in Howell where a guy operated a pirate radio station that played jazz, but the FCC shut it down.

Let’s hope the big corporations like Clear Channel will not kill this bill.

Report says consolidation gives conservatives unfair advantage on talk radio

It’s pretty obvious to everyone that conservatives have an unfair monopoly on talk radio, but the media reform group the Center for American Progress just released a report that conforms that there are 10 hours of conservative talk for every one hour liberal talk, thanks, primarily, to media consolidation that has five mega companies owning almost off the 257 talk radio stations in the country.

The report says each weekday, 2,570 hours and 15 minutes of conservative talk are broadcast on these stations compared to 254 hours of progressive talk—10 times as much conservative talk as progressive talk. 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.

Many radio stations with liberal and progressive hosts or formats are flipping or, changing their formats, despite good and even better ratings than the format they once had. This began to occur shortly after the November election where we saw the success of Democrats in taking control of both the U.S. House and Senate, and many people point to the emergence of talk radio – such as the start-up company Air America - as one reasons by getting information out on Republican misdeeds and outright incompetence. In the battleground state of Ohio, WTPG in Columbus was enjoying its highest ratings since the old days of Top 40 hits with a new progressive format, but some six months ago the station inexplicably flipped and ratings have not been as good.

Some local communities are fighting back. A progressive station in Madison, Wisc. suffered the same fate, but a grassroots effort that included petition drives, demonstrations and publicity stooped the flip. A new web site called Nonstop Radio has sprung up to help them and other flips.

The trend in conservatives dominating the radio waves is even occurring in urban areas where the population always tends to be liberal and democratic. A separate analysis of all of the news/talk stations in the top 10 radio markets reveals that 76 percent of the programming in these markets is conservative and 24 percent is progressive, although programming is more balanced in markets such as New York and Chicago.

Many experts say the reason is the repel of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 under Ronald Regan. The explosion of conservative talk radio is attributed to the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine by the Federal Communications Commission. The Fairness Doctrine was a regulation—formally implemented by the FCC in 1949, but dating back to the early days of broadcasting—that required broadcasters to devote airtime to important and controversial issues and to provide contrasting views on these issues in some form.

The report says the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine is a factor, but it’s only one reason and not the biggest. The report concludes the “gap between conservative and progressive talk radio is the result of multiple structural problems in the U.S. regulatory system, particularly the complete breakdown of the public trustee concept of broadcast, the elimination of clear public interest requirements for broadcasting, and the relaxation of ownership rules including the requirement of local participation in management.”

“Ownership diversity is perhaps the single most important variable contributing to the structural imbalance based on the data.” A quantitative analysis of all 10,506 licensed commercial radio stations reveals that stations owned by women, minorities, or local owners are statistically less likely to air conservative hosts or shows.

In other words, ownership consolidation of all radio stations by just five major companies is the problem. There is no local ownership in local radio stations, and no local input or understanding of the local market. For example, Clear Channel owns 145 stations and 86 percent are conservative, and Citadel owns 23 stations and all of them are conservative. That lack of local control has led to the inexplicable imbalance in the urban areas, and a perfect example is our own WJR, the Great Conservative Voice of the Great Lakes.

WJR is 100 percent conservative, and all of its hosts, with the possible exception of sportswriter Mitch Albom and maybe the guy who does the Handyman show, are right-wingers. It’s no surprise that WJR is owned by Citadel. It’s a perfect example of the lack of local input or understanding of the local market. Detroit is one of the most liberal cities in America in a Blue state, yet there is no non-conservative voice on the most powerful radio station in the state. To me that’s not only unacceptable, it’s bad business and against the law for WJR to use the public’s airwaves free and ignore the political region they operate in and broadcast nothing but rightwing views.

Anyone who has ever watched Faux “News” for comic relief and to see what the other side is doing has recently seen hatemonger Sean Hanity screaming about how bringing the Fairness Doctrine back is an attempt to silence him and Rush Blowhard. I have no idea where he got that ridiculous talking point, but it is simply not true. In fact, the Center for American Progress says the Fairness Doctrine has never really been repealed.

From a regulatory perspective, the Fairness Doctrine was never formally repealed. The FCC did announce in 1987 that it would no longer enforce certain regulations under the umbrella of the Fairness Doctrine, and a 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. Many legal experts argue that the FCC has the authority to enforce it again—thus it technically would not be considered repealed.

The report does offer some recommendations to bring some fairness and balance back to the airwaves that belong to the public. “Restore local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations. Ensure greater local accountability over radio licensing. Require commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public interest obligations to pay a fee to support public broadcasting.”

In the meantime, I will continue to listen to Air America and Stephanie Miller on my computer when I’m working, and when I’m in my car and in the right geographic position to pick them up I will listen to Ann Arbor’s WLBY 1290 and Detroit’s WDTW 1310. I suggest you do the same and support their sponsors.