Missoula’s Progressive Talk Radio Hijacked, Again….
By Don John Linton, New West Unfiltered 11-03-09
Turning the radio dial from NPR news over to AM 930 this morning revealed an unfamiliar voice. Instead to the comical antics of The Stephanie Miller Show, there was a local show, Voices of Montana with Aaron Flint.
Great I thought a local show. But they sure talk about Bush a lot, I pondered. Then I went to the KMPT website to see how the new lineup looked. “A new attitude and a great line-up or some of the best conservative talk!” a tag line read. The best conservative talk!
Yes, Missoula, it’s happened again. Our local progressive talk radio has be replaced with conservative talk.
I called the local station to ask about the change. The receptionist that answered said it was a corporate decision passed down from high up. She also said she had gotten 21 calls so far this Tuesday morning.
I called the headquarters of GapWest Broadcasting in Scottsdale, AZ. The answering reception said I was the first to call and had no information as to what sparked the change.
So here we go again Zootown, another progressive voice outlet smothered by big HQ decisions.
If you all remember our old FM 105.9 station that featured an Air America line up was shut down by new owners Simmons Media Group of Salt Lake City, UT.
So now once again an out of state owner of our air waves has shut down a progressive voice.
Missoula step up and call the station and their HQ and demand a return of the progressive line-up. We have more than enough conservative talk on the radio dial.
The local office can be reached at 406-728-9300. The Head office in Scottsdale, Az can be reached at (480) 970-1360. Call them now!!
Comments
You're right- most of the format is conservative talk...but I would hardly describe "Voices of Montana" as conservative talk- as we bring in voices from all over the spectrum. While you listened today and heard former Bush White House Deputy Press Secretary Scott Stanzel- I wish we could have been on the air in Missoula yesterday when I featured Native American Vietnam Veterans FROM MONTANA who are returning to Vietnam tomorrow on a "Healing Journey." Or how about tomorrow when Missoula's Bob Struckman with the SEIU backed "Montanans for Change that Works" is on the show (after former Senator Conrad Burns of course)...or how about last week when UM's Nobel Prize Winning Dr. Steve Running was on the show...or on 9/11 when UM's Dr. Merhdad Kia was on the program...or when the head of the Montana Democratic Party Jim Elliott joined us for the full half hour.
Tune in again tomorrow- and join us for the conversation...heck- if you're ticked off about someone says- then give us a call...I'll even pay for the phone bill if you call 866-NBS-LIVE.
whatever show that replaced stephanie miller was chalked full of hateful, ignorant callers this morning. it was sad, scary, and infuriating. give me the name of the show and the phone number and i'll join the conversation every day. progressive radio has def been hijacked. i miss steph already.
thanks for commenting. I will give your show a listen this morning. I do like local content shows certainly.
Please be sure to throw some hard balls at Burns. Congratulate him for returning the funds he received from lobbyist Jack Abramof, for he does deserve credit for that. But quiz him on why he believes politicians should take money from anyone but their own electoral constituents. Basically ask him if he believes in campaign finance reform. True campaign finance reform.
And I look forward to hearing from Bob Struckman.
Keep up the show and I'll give it a chance.
I'm still very disappointed in the loss of progressive voices once again in Missoula. I feel the real issue here lies in the almost complete out-of-state ownership of our airwaves.
But I'm glad we have a Local Montana voice, I understand you broadcast out of Billings, is that right??
Don
This is simply about the dollars, as it should be. They can make more as a conservative station than they can a liberal one. They owe us nothing. If you want to hear liberal talk radio then buy your own station.
Don't get me wrong. I'll miss the variety. Like I said, I think both sides are little full of BS some of the time. But don't have a pity party for yourselves. The world of big business is a cruel, hard place and if you want to play with the big boys you'll need to learn to hit back as hard as it hits you. You want a progressive station? Buy one. That's the way it works.
I won't listen to right wing hate radio. I deleted your station from my radio. Hijacked again. Damn you!
Further, you really need to be thinking hard about what exactly a "fairness doctrine" might entail. Or, the proposal by the SAME people who demand a return of the "fairness doctrine" for journalism to be set aside in a non-profit shelter. Way too many opportunities for manipulation and, you bet, politicization of our public debate.
Finally, "progressive" radio should work...I must wonder if it is because progressives all work for the government and don't see a need to advertise?
Glad you'll give it a listen- definitely local programming. When I got back from Afghanistan I was still living in Missoula and tried to pitch hosting the show from there- but our network headquarters is in Billings- and so at least for a few years it makes sense to be here with the rest of the team. Here's a link to my bio http://www.northernbroadcasting.com/ABOUT/Staff/AaronFlint/tabid/151/Default.aspx Before Afghanistan I worked as a reporter at KTVQ where I also had the opportunity to interview Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, in addition to Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney. I hope I can usher in more of a forum atmosphere- where people on all sides of the issues are comfortable to call in. (You may have heard of UM's "Footbridge Forum", I pitched the project that brought in the original funding for that show while I was a student at UM) So, for example, I'm not going to work to play "Gotcha Journalism" for most of the show- but it's a great chance for callers to ask some tough questions of their own- for example: today Ken in Great Falls questioned Conrad Burns about what he is making as a lobbyist now.
But back to your main question- I call Glasgow, MT my hometown (lived there longer than anywhere else), started college at Howard University in DC but finished in Broadcast Journalism at the University of Montana. My wife's from there- both our kids were born there- and I get back as much as possible. Send me an e-mail and we can grab coffee next time I'm in town.
-Aaron Flint
Screw GapWest. I do not advertise with them right now but will be looking for corporations that do and calling those folks asking they withdraw their support for the Hate Movement of Glen Beck et al.
Look up Mark Lloyd and "free press" dot org dot google in combination. Look at the stuff on media ownership and media diversity and read the signals. You should understand "progressinese" better than I can, but a lot of it needs very little translation.
Finally, I guess I should raise a point here about some of the polling, showing liberals (skyoosemee, PROGRESSIVES) being 20 percent of the population that admits a bias...with 40 percent going the conservative route. With twice the listener base overall, the audience is simply twice as large, and twice as attractive.
That in turn raises the issue, are people progressive or conservative BEFORE they tune in, or does radio actually change minds? Come on....
I would just suggest contacting the local businesses that advertise just to make sure they know their products and services will be mentioned intermixed with rants from terrorists like Michael Savage.
So far the following have advertised while I was listening:
Eagle Satellite
Missoula Org of Realtors
Double Front Chicken
Montana Pain Management
Give them a call let them know what is going on.
I had 930 on all summer as I worked in my garden and liked to listen as I've done household tasks since. This was my favorite station and I made a point of using the advertisers when I could. This stinks.
That's okay, liberals, you still have most of the media. Oh, wait. They are going bankrupt, too.
(congrats to Aaron and company - I love to hear more local viewpoints - even if Hannity and Rush took Running's comments out of context!)
I guess the truth hurt too much.
Time to go back to dumbing down the population.
No more talk radio for me.
Bring on the music.
And somebody please fill the huge gap.
What a shame, and how sad to only have half the argument presented to us. pathetic.
i'll be damned if i listen to any more talk radio in missoula.
jerks.
bring on the music.
If the beliefs are preloaded, then changing minds, which apparently is the eventual goal, is pretty much a moot issue. So what is the real bother??
Well, I find listening to Thom Hartmann excruciating. I also find Thom somewhat on the needlessly-vituperative side. So if Thom was the only thing I could get on the issues-discussion format, I'd be ripping and miffed. Amy Goodman? Homicidal, by golly. So I understand why some of the folks here are upset.
But there is, after all, National Progressive Radio, aka NPR. But why is it that nonprofit, government sanctioned media is the only place on the radio waves where "progressives" have an intellectual home? This is not a random sort of thing.
Here's one way it's not random...people like to hear stuff that affirms their worldview. Ya know, more of that Stuart Smalley sort of stuff, in a bipartisan way.
But along that line, of hearing what "should" be heard, why do outfits like Free Press want the "nonprofit" model to become the mainstream of journalistic practice? That's not a random brain fart, but there are fundamental structural and psychological factors in play here.
But going back to the start, Tim, if the purpose is to change minds or find solutions, and the audience is preloaded, then it really doesn't make much sense to demand equal penetration.
equal penetration??? no one is demanding that. there was 1 progressive station out of 20+. now there are none. i don't need equal, i just need a choice. missoula radio does not offer a choice anymore.
we are all naive to think that gapwest doesn't have an agenda. sure the want to make money, but they would rather spread conservatard radio across the country. i refused to believe that 930AM was losing money. show us the numbers. they had plenty of advertisers. if you ever went to their website, you could see that they have plenty of sponsors.
http://www.missoulasprogressivetalk.com/main.php
response to frank discussion:
FD: "If you want to hear liberal talk radio then buy your own station. But don't have a pity party for yourselves. The world of big business is a cruel, hard place and if you want to play with the big boys you'll need to learn to hit back as hard as it hits you. You want a progressive station? Buy one. That's the way it works."
your arguement is illogical. no one should have to buy anything to hear the other side of an issue/viewpoint/bill. do you really think that missoula has a super strong, conservative majority? do conservatives out number liberals 20-1? of course not, not even remotely close, but our radio programming does. obama won 62% of missoula county. how can conservative radio be the only voice in missoula? why should radio stations ignore a large portion of the population? even if only 10% of missoula listened, isn't that enough? everything can't be for the masses. you can't just ignore a portion of the popular that large. give the people what they want. that's what the auto industry is doing. producing, smaller, more efficient cars. radio should be doing the same. the people of missoula have spoken. are you listening?
have the guts to tell us where you work.
to aaron flint,
your guests this week and next include the vice president of fed ex, the president of the chamber of commerce, and denny rehberg. how progressive of you.
"your arguement is illogical. no one should have to buy anything to hear the other side of an issue/viewpoint/bill. do you really think that missoula has a super strong, conservative majority?"
Again, if you want to have a left leaning station go ahead and buy one. That's the way it works in a free market place. Always has, always will.
I hear a lot of "boo hoo hoo poor us" in this thread. That isn't going to change anything. Buying a station and putting it on the air would. Until then you're going to have to face the facts that things just are the way they are.
I listened to the station & am sorry to see it go too. I just know that in the end though it is up to the people that own the station to pick the programming that they want to. That's the way it works. You get to do that if you own something. Right or wrong, that's something that's never going to change.
People on the left (and right) make all sorts of financial decisions every day that do not always make sense if you are only looking at the bottom line. They do it for personal, moral reasons. If that's what the station is doing here that's their right and I wouldn't want to take that away. Would you want someone to take away some of your "green" options because they didn't all make the best financial sense? I think not.
Over at Pieceofmind.wordpress.com:
Marshall McLuhan called radio “the tribal drum”. (Marshall McLuhan, Radio: The Tribal Drum, 1964)
"Radio is provided with its cloak of invisibility, like any other medium. It comes to us ostensibly with person-to-person directness that is private and intimate, while in more urgent fact, it is really a subliminal echo chamber of magical power to touch remote and forgotten chords. …Radio affects most people intimately, person-to-person, offering a world of unspoken communication between writer-speaker and listener. That is the immediate aspect of radio. A private experience. The subliminal depths of radio are charged with the resonating echoes of tribal horns and antique drums. This is inherent in the very nature of this medium, with its power to turn the psyche and society into a single echo chamber. … The only medium for which our education now offers some civil defense is the print medium."
Another good lineup sucked into the black hole of hate radio.
you are still missing my point. does missoula have a huge, conservative base to support all of this hate talk? the answer is a resounding NO. so why do our radio stations only air the garbage spewed by the right wing minority.
how can these radio stations not give the people what they want. sell whatever the people want and nothing they don't want. isn't that fundamental principle of capitalism? but based on what radio stations are doing here in missoula, they should be run out of business, because 62% of us voted for obama.
nobody is crying. missoula clearly wants progressive radio. the issue here is why can't we have it. who is pulling the strings and for what purpose?
"does missoula have a huge, conservative base to support all of this hate talk? the answer is a resounding NO. so why do our radio stations only air the garbage spewed by the right wing minority"
It's either one of two things. Either it makes more economic sense to have conversative programming (they can sell more ads) or the owners of the station have made a personal, moral judgement that, "economics be damned we want to promote a conservative agenda". That's their prerogative. They have that right. It's a free country.
Life is not always fair. I want a new car. I can't afford one. Does one of the local dealerships owe me one? After all, other people have one, why can't I?
You want progressive radio. Who do you think owes you that? Why is it your right? If you owned a local radio station would you like someone telling you what sort of programming you should run? How would you like it if the "tea baggers" protested outside your station and insisted that you carry the Glen Beck program? See how that works? The knife cuts both ways.
1. Libs all work for the government and don't WANT to advertise for more customers because that means more work;
2. Because they all work for the government, customers can be coerced into buying the product, or at least paying for it, without any advertising needed.
So there is no incentive to buy ads.
Seriously, if you liberals want Thom and Amy and Rachel, then why don't you give buying a station a whirl. Some of these outlets can't all be raking it in...Z 600? That's in Montana and you could probably move the equipment cheap and still keep the frequency.
"The radio commendators that have survived have comments based in fact. Air America is based in fiction and emotion. Advertisers didn't support them. For any show to last 20 plus years, elements of fact have to be found. Air America simply didn't have that.
That's okay, liberals, you still have most of the media. Oh, wait. They are going bankrupt, too."
Now if that isn't a laugh! Seriously. I've listened to both conservative & liberal radio and it's pretty much a dead heat as far as who is more hypocritical or full of BS. The same bombastic techniques the left was using 18 months ago are now being used by the right. No one is lilly white or has clean hands when it comes to talk radio. or even politics if you want to be honest.
Both the left and the right stand on the stairs and beat their chests and put on a great show about how much better they are than the "other" side. How different they are. Why they are right and the other side is wrong. Their scream and spit & shake their fists.........then they go into the building together, close the door behind them and shake hands. Behind the closed doors all of the animosity fades. They sit down together, have a drink and a good laugh as work together to **** us all.
The joke is on you. The rabid right and the loonie left. No one wins, except for the politicians in power.
Cheers.
Between the Right Wing AM stations and the Christian activist FM stations, we can pretty much throw the Fairness Doctrine into the landfill as the public's airwaves are all but usurped. And we let it happen. Broadcast licenses come with strict regulations, but they are never enforced. The FCC has a formal complain process, but it's seldom used nor seldom produces any results. ( make on-air tapes to capture the outright lies and unanswered bigotry verbatim if you intend to make an FCC case, and send registered letters to the station owners ).
Radio has become a wasteland. A festering sore that is not allowed to heal or even be treated. It's Anti-democracy at irs worst adn cannot be apologized for by people like Flint and his peers, in Missoula or anywhere else. This problem is everywhere.
Thankfully , there is broadband.
The other members of the Congressional delegation have both been invited to be on the show in addition to Congressman Rehberg. In fact- I told them- let me know whenever the senator would like to be on the show and I'll make it happen. Same has been said to other statewide elected officials of both parties. Don't know if you would consider that "Progressive" of me or not. But so far- Congressman Rehberg has been gracious enough to take questions on the health care debate. You must not have seen Tuesdays lineup. For a hint- see Linda Swift's Op-Ed in the Billings Gazette.
by: Amber Sands, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed
There's a classic problem for progressives who want to change the media: the media doesn't like to cover itself. Especially not when it comes to issues that challenge the status quo of corporate control. It's like turning to the military for news about the peace movement, or asking Big Oil to report on climate change legislation.
So you may not have heard much about the grassroots effort to create hundreds of new, non-commercial radio stations. Overcoming nine years of opposition from the broadcasting lobby, the Local Community Radio Act is on the verge of a vote in the House of Representatives.
The bill would expand low-power FM (LPFM) radio, first introduced by the Federal Communications Commission in 2000. Media activists and community groups nationwide demanded this access to the airwaves to combat the deregulation that concentrated media ownership into fewer hands. The FCC began licensing low-power stations between the larger ones on the radio dial, but Congress promptly hobbled the low-power service with restrictions.
If you're wondering why Congress would step on the toes of the agency that regulates communications, well, ask the media - they may not cover media regulation, but they spend millions influencing it.
Fearing competition from stations that would carry original, local programming, broadcasters claimed that LPFM stations might interfere with the signals of full-power stations. The broadcasting lobby demanded that Congress widen the required distance between the radio frequencies of an existing full-power station and a would-be LPFM. Congress made the spacing requirements so vast that only rural areas can meet the criteria for a low-power license.
To put this in context, although 800 LPFMs are already on the air, only one (in Richmond, Virginia) is licensed in one of the 50 largest radio markets. These markets are collectively home to more than 160 million people. Under the new bill, Congressional restrictions on LPFMs would be repealed and the FCC would regain the authority to regulate the radio spectrum in cities as well as rural areas.
Like so many scientific arguments written by industry lobbyists, the case against LPFMs doesn't make much sense. A $2.2 million taxpayer-funded study showed that low-power stations don't cause harmful interference to full-power stations. And 100-watt LPFMs are almost identical to the 250-watt mini-stations (called translators) that full-power stations use to repeat their signals across wide areas. Translators rely on the same equipment as LPFMs, operating with higher power levels at distances even closer to full-power stations. Yet no one's complained about them. The difference is in the name on the license: Incumbent broadcasters own the translators. LPFMs are owned by local governments, nonprofit organizations, churches and schools (in other words, the competition).
Reading the names on licenses is a good way to see the effects of deregulation on radio. Before 1985, there were simply more names on the list. An individual or company could own only one AM or FM station in each market and only seven of each nationally. Several rounds of deregulation later, a single company can now own up to eight radio stations per market and any number nationally.
Contrary to the "free market" logic of deregulation, the lifting of ownership caps has driven prices up. Radio stations that once sold for between seven and twelve times projected cash flow now cost 20-22 times cash flow, requiring equity that most small businesses don't have. Ownership is limited to the very largest chains, which can buy advertising, music and on-air talent at bulk rates - which is why every station on your dial features the same format and cycles through the same overplayed pop songs.
The loss of local programming is only one casualty of deregulation. Media consolidation disproportionately affects women and minority media owners, for several reasons. Historically, women and people of color have often been barred from the business. Back when the radio spectrum was less crowded and commercial licenses were free, only white men got them. In today's cramped radio market, you must buy an existing station to get a commercial license, requiring enormous upfront capital. It's a high barrier to market entry for women and people of color, who face discrimination when applying for bank loans and the jobs needed to gain high-level industry experience.
Low-power radio lacks these barriers. The engineering and legal fees are low, licenses are free and community leadership is more valued than industry insidership. Unlike the slick but vacuous programming produced by commercial radio's huge economies of scale, LPFMs are hyperlocal. With limited resources, they do what big networks won't, covering city council elections, local musicians and high school football.
That may be why the Prometheus Radio Project's campaign to expand LPFM (http://www.expandlpfm.org) has brought together groups with seemingly little in common besides the need for a locally accountable voice in the media.
Native American Tribal groups hope to use reservation radio to revitalize their languages. Mississippi emergency responders want to broadcast hurricane alerts. Florida's migrant tomato pickers and Oregon's farmworkers use radio to organize for better wages and working conditions. And music fans everywhere want to hear independent musicians who don't have the business ties to get corporate airtime.
Even in the age of Internet, radio remains a vital resource for community organizing and expression. This is especially true for the elderly, speakers of minority languages, and communities with low literacy rates or limited broadband access. With a range of 3-5 miles, LPFM is well-suited for issues that affect a single neighborhood, such as organizing around housing rights or building community gardens.
If the media did cover the fight for low-power radio, the story shouldn't be about FCC rules, or engineering studies, or even the Local Community Radio Act's supporters in Congress. The real story is a national movement of grassroots groups who are claiming the airwaves - after all, we lease them to broadcasters to serve the public interest. If they aren't doing the job, we can take the airwaves back and do it ourselves.
You want to know WHY they changed? It has nothing to do with politics or ideals.
No one listens to those stations. Those that do, don't support the advertiser enough.
ITS THAT SIMPLE
The advertisers stopped buying time.
When are you going to wake up? There are no laws stopping liberal/progressive radio, they just can't seem to make any money at it. It's tough to pay the bills when no one listens and no one wants to advertise. The only reason NPR is still on the radio is because the tax payer subsidize it.
Listen to it, get a job, and buy the stuff being advertised. That's the solution! There's no conspiracy
The only reason NPR is still on the radio is because the listeners and on-air sponsors and supporters subsidize it.
Did KMPT flip because they just don't like the progressive format, if radio folk think along those same lines as the owner I talk about here? Or is he wrong for losing money on his conservative format? I guess my point here is that it's not as simple as "ayn's" take, though he articulates well, the straight-line, ill-informed thinking of a partisan wingnut, teabagger, etc. etc.
keep it up…….
http://www.sayradio.com/