November 18, 2012
Dear Sirs:
Results of the resent election: Public airwaves vs. antitrust
I was under the understanding that the Public airwaves are part of the commons and that we all have a stake in this. If one corporation owns the majority of the radio stations in a given market if not all of them and they dictate what is available to listen to, isn’t this a monopoly? Where is the US Justice Dept. and the FCC? It is hard to believe that this is not in violation of some anti-trust laws.
I live in the Portland OR area and Clear Channel just took our Progressive Talk Radio on KPOJ 620 AM, away form us a week ago on Friday. In time AM talk radio may go by the way side, but at present some of us still listen to it. The idea that there is no progressive talk radio on in Portland OR, period, is totally unacceptable.
Yes we can get some of our favorite shows on the computer but when we are listen there we cannot access other info on the web, AM radio still has a place in our lives please don’t take it away. But some require us to pay to get the pod-cast we cannot afford to pay for.
This is what I thought the commons was supposed to be about, so that the public would have complete and unlimited access to the public airwaves. I thought that when you paid for a license to run radio on the public airwaves you have some obligation to broadcast items in your community of public interest. Well in Portland OR at 5:30 pm on November 9th Clear Channel has just started violating that Public Interest as there is nothing that is serving the public’s interest when it comes to Progressive Talk Radio any more.
Thank You

Richard Fletcher

Thank you Richard. I was inspired by this article and your post, and have written Bobby Baker as well.

Very interesting show tonight, earlier this evening. Kudos to Sue and Brad.

The only liberal voice in Wisconsin, to combat the RightWing WGOP, was 'Sly in the Morning', and now after 15 yrs (?), he and entire news staff at WTDY Madison, were "let go" on Wed. 11/21/12. A sad day for free speech, an average day for the RNC PR BS.

Accorgint to this article, the change at KPOJ is due to low ratings:

Ratings numbers from the past two years show KPOJ trails its talk-radio competitors—and Portland's two sports stations.

From October 2011 to October 2013, according to the ratings tracked by Arbitron, KPOJ fell from a 1.1 share to a 1.0 share of listeners—meaning 1 percent of listeners above the age of 12 were tuned to 620 AM. That's well behind last month's 3.5 share for News Radio KEX 1190 (which airs Rush Limbaugh) and the 5.0 share for KXL FM News 101 (which airs Lars Larson).

http://www.wweek.com/por...poj_cancelling_poli.html

Steve J., you only have some of the story. KPOJ was a low signal station that was not promoted by Clear Channel at all, and given a low budget with staff removed. They weren't willing to put any dollars into enhancing the progressive format.
For more insight on this, an interesting essay by Adam Klugman, who was a host for Clear Channel on KPOJ and appeared on the morning show as a frequent guest: http://www.blueoregon.co...ear-channel-dumped-kpoj/

Mary59, KPOJ is not a low-signal station...it's one of the strongest during the day and is heard all the way down to Eugene and up to Olympia. It's one of the stronger stations (maybe not in your area).

Everything else you said is true. I'm glad you referenced the Klugman article...was wracking my memory trying to recall where I read that "ratings" was an easily manipulated thing, and the Klugman article was one of the places.

I wonder just how "ratings" factor into the number of sports channels I heard on the radio last weekend on the Portland dial. There were easily 10 stations playing some kind of sports at the same time. It was f*****g unbelievable.

Does anyone recall that it was Slick WIlly who drove the final nail into fairness in broadcasting? What it all comes down to is that so many of the Democrats in Congress and at the Presidential level are as paid off willingly as any Republican! I would not hold my breath waiting for congress to do something. What needs to happen is to round up some liberals with some$$$ and get some people who know the radio biz and start working on a network that has some local content that reaches every nook and cranny in the country. It is going to take lots of work and more money but in a few years it should be self supporting if you get people willing to go out and PROMOTE and SELL the IDEA Everywhere.
I do miss KPOJ here in Portland, we do have a decent public station but it's not the same and they have changed lots of their programming in the past few years and not alwys for the best.

Steve, when I say low signal, it's a comparison. KPOJ's day time signal strength is 25,000 Watts, half of the AM stations you mentioned as having "higher ratings"
In the evening the signal strength drops (around 5:30pm) to the point where I know longer pick it up clearly (I live about 30 miles east of Portland)

A lot of interesting comments about this ratings rationale being used elsewhere (such as San Diego) and when the format was changed, the ratings went even lower.

It may seem to Clear Channel executives that they're making a strictly business decision based upon their own short term assets, but it leaves the public interest out entirely.

Just as an FYI, The Mic 92.1 FM is Madison WI's progressive radio. Apparently they're starting to play more sports but its still heavily progressive talk. You can listen to it through iheart radio.

Funny, I heard this story the other way. That progressive stations (which lose money for a variety of reasons) are put up before the elections as free advertising for the progressive point of view, and then taken down to a more supportable size directly afterwards.

(Despite listenership, advertising is bought by business and corporations and progressive talk radio is often anti-business and anti-corporation. So advertisers find decreased response from progressive talk stations despite their listenership ratings. Some progressive talkers break through this stigma.)

Luagha said @ 11:

Funny, I heard this story the other way. That progressive stations (which lose money for a variety of reasons) are put up before the elections as free advertising for the progressive point of view, and then taken down to a more supportable size directly afterwards.

I am familiar with no radio station where the above scenario has occurred. (Not that it hasn't, I've just never heard of any such station, feel free to point me to one.) Moreover, I'd love to see the evidence that progressive stations "lose money". They cost almost nothing to run, since virtually all of them pull nationally syndicated shows for free. They may not make as much money as Rightwing stations (which is to be expected, since those stations are generally given much more powerful transmitters and even promoted and stuff), but whoever told you they "lose money" probably had a not entirely honest reason for saying as much.

(Despite listenership, advertising is bought by business and corporations and progressive talk radio is often anti-business and anti-corporation. So advertisers find decreased response from progressive talk stations despite their listenership ratings. Some progressive talkers break through this stigma.)

Again, that sounds like propaganda, but feel free to share any actual evidence to support your claim. And, for the record, while some progressive talkers are anti-corporatism and anti-corporatocracy (specifically, the notion that corporations are "people" and should enjoy the same rights as actual human beings, without any of the downsides of being human, like going to jail, dying, etc.), I'm familiar with NONE who are "anti-business" or even "anti-corporation" in a general sense.

Funny how much disinformation is put out there about progressive radio, eh? I wonder where folks get it. (Not really.)

I've always had a pet theory that rightwing listeners are more gullible on average, making advertising more effective on them.

Mr Doyle,
I live in Portland Oregon, and recently the local progressive station was flipped over night to a sports station. As you probably know, it was one of two progressive stations in our state. Soon, the only station with a progressive perspective in the state of Washington is switching, as well. These stations are not being flipped because there is not an audience.
I extremely resent the fact that the taxes of myself and millions like me are used to support the FCC, and yet their is NOTHING on the radio that discusses politics from my perspective.
There is right wing hatred and misinformation on every AM talk show station in my state now. Where are the voices expressing a different point of view? Why are they being shut out of the PUBLIC airwaves?
I know that a movement to change the status quo will be fiercely opposed by the controlling power of the right wing, but if this issue is not addressed, we face decades of misinformed voters, unexposed to different ideas, and therefore with no critical thinking skills.
These are all vital necessities for a democracy, and your responsibility is to protect and preserve the access of ALL Americans to the public airwaves for information .
I urge you to confront this serious grassroots problem.
Thank you,

So here's the latest, boys and girls: The FCC has lost our petitions to deny the licenses of WTMJ and WISN. Luckily, I have proof they were delivered to each station and the FCC.

But your emails are having an effect; the FCC's Peter Doyle is working really hard to let me re-file. Without public pressure, none of it happens.

Problem with all of this is the FCC is a regulatory agency at no point do they claim ownership of the airwaves. Progressive Radio failed because of poor arbitron ratings, period. Air America is a classic example. It went bankrupt.

From my blog.

"Of course she ignores the part of the first amendment guaranteeing freedom of the press and their right to editorialize and the fact that Zapple applies to the purchase of advertising not the content of a talk show host. In the latest post by MAC they all but said the above."