Is Air America THAT Much of a Threat?

It's now been two weeks since Air America Radio declared that they were filing for Chapter 11 protection in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York but so far the world hasn't come to an end (for liberal/progressives) and AAR is still on the air (to the dismay of most of the right-wing punditry). On the evening of the announcement, I was out at our local Meijer's and decided to purchase a copy of Air America: The Playbook: What a Bunch of Left Wing Media Types have to Teach you about a World Gone Right to commemorate the event (appropriately made on October 13th--a Friday). I waded through it when I got home and was delighted to see that it wasn't just the contributions of Al Franken or the more well-known personalities (Randi Rhodes, Sam Seder). Although Al did write the foreword, almost all of the current and some former contributors/hosts were able to provide their unique perspective on this on-going fight for the minds of the American listening public.

As I've written before (here and here) and as Franken details in the book's introduction, AAR started its existence under a dark cloud of financial difficulties and it was only sheer determination that had them endure that constant strain for almost 2-1/2 years. Now that the filing has finally happened (many detractors predicted this event since the network first went on the air on 31 March 2004), the pressure of operating under such constraints can be temporarily lifted and allow the 'green eye shade' folks an opportunity to right their 'left listing' ship.

Many of AAR's foes point to this issue as an indicator of the idea of liberal talk radio being a commercial failure. However, it can be seen in a different light when compared to what Fox News went through during their start-up. In The Playbook, Franken makes the following statement:

'Capital is important when starting up a major media network. Take, for example, the Fox News Channel...just to get on the air, Rupert Murdoch had to pay cable carriers $11 per viewer. In other words, $5.50 per eyeball--roughly. That cost approximately $187 million. Add to that the $130 million operating deficit in the first two years, and you're looking at more than a $300 million loss.'

Such dollar figures dwarf the $16 million deficit that AAR has declared in its recent bankruptcy filing. For additional context, the Washington Times, that city's 'second paper' and a conservative alternative to mainstream news nationally, received an estimated $1.7 billion in subsidies from its owner (Sun Myung Moon and his Unification Church) during that publication's first twenty years of existence (1982-2002)--an average $85 million annual 'bailout'.

Rupert Murdoch & the Rev. Sun Myung Moon...
deep pockets that the right wing 'picked' to fund their media pulpits...

OK, enough about the legal proceedings...let's look at what all this ballyhoo is all about...

In my most recent post, I provided a graphic representation of AAR's presence during my trip through Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia. Since the network only lists stations in a text-based format, I took the liberty of preparing a map of their national coverage:

Upon examination, it is obvious that AAR has NOT adopted Howard Dean's '50 state' strategy. While no progressive listener is ever truly barred from 'tuning in' (if they choose to stream the audio over the Internet or subscribe to XM satellite radio), it appears that 15 states do not have a station within their borders. Signal propagation from some of the stronger transmitters do provide coverage for those 'forsaken' jurisdictions. For example, I was able to hear (weakly) WWRL's 25,000 watt signal out of New York City in eastern Pennsylvania so I would assume that most of northern and central New Jersey--lacking an affiliate of their own--would be able to tune to 1600AM on their car or home radios. The 'dots' on my graphic only represent an estimated coverage area (most of AAR affiliates are on stations broadcasting at 5,000 watts effective radiated power or less). Weather, time of day, solar activity and terrain are several factors that can affect the signal strength and quality on a day-to-day (and sometimes hour-to-hour) basis.

Several locations correspond to major media markets (New York, Chicago, Los Angeles) but one outlet truly surprised me. According to a wikipedia.org's listing of affiliates, one of KYTI-FM's ('the Coyote') high definition, or HD, channels carries AAR programming to the listeners of the greater Sheridan, Wyoming area. Unlike some smaller stations located in 'red' states that carry this progressive programming to a college crowd (Chapel Hill, NC and Columbia, SC for their respective state's university campuses, Spokane, WA for Gonzaga University--close to the Idaho 'hinterlands'), I could not immediately find ANY overt reason why that community (the town only has one junior college and its claim to fame has been its selection as the #1 Western town in the nation--not a very liberal haven) would broadcast AAR, let alone be the only one in the US to offer it via HD radio. However, when I looked at the broadcasting coverage map for their transmitter, I noticed that it extends over the Wyoming border into southern Montana. With the influx of business and entertainment moguls into that part of the country since the 1970s and the use of a new technology that is somewhat pricy to the standard radio listener, I'm guessing this programming will be heard only by those 'Hollywood' expatriates or rich vacationers from the East and 'Left' coasts. If Dick Cheney ever heard about the 'treason' that was going on back in his 'home' state, I'm sure he'd roll over in his grave...oh wait, he's not dead...he just resembles it...

AAR's 'Wild Wild West' outpost...
I wonder if Wyoming's 'favorite son' is aware of this???

If you look again at the national map, you will see that there isn't a whole lot of 'blue' out there. If I were to take the time to plot out all of the stations that carry, say, Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, that graphic would be bleeding bright red. Since their take-over of AM talk radio in the late 1980s and early 1990s (fueled primarily by Reagan's veto of placing the FCC's existing 'Fairness Doctrine' equal time policy into law), conservatives have had a stranglehold over this medium to the near exclusion of any liberals or progressives in the national arena (still had pockets in traditionally Democratic strongholds--New York, San Francisco--and current personalities Randi Rhodes and Ed Shultz honed their craft during this period).

With such overpowering assets (hundreds of stations and millions of listeners), I scratch my head and wonder what conservatives can possibly be afraid of. Some say that AM talk radio is simply a 'guy thing', a place where 'boys will be boys'. A rough and tumble environment that liberals supposedly detest (unlike FM, where NPR holds sway over the nation's ear). Others say that liberal talk radio is not 'entertaining' enough to capture and hold a steady audience. Still more think that the format is exclusively for them to wage combat against the alleged liberal media and its bias when presenting news and current events through the other traditional mediums (television, newspapers). Since their conquest of the AM dial, conservatives have made strides in cable news (although recently slumping, the Fox News Channel is the highest rated on television today due to the mass congregation of GOP viewers to that sole 'citadel' defending against the influences of the 'mainstream media') as well as on the 'internets' (a plethora of news sites and blogs dedicated to pounding out the right wing drumbeat on a 24/7 basis to a ever-growing constituency).

Conservative America's multimedia 'drummers'...

So what does all of this mean for AAR? Since they went in 'for a pound' and decided to create a full-fledged network back in 2004, they now have one of two choices. They can either secure additional funding (pledges like PBS does, premium services for web-specific items, etc.) to properly establish a true national network to carry their programming (the advent of HD radio could provide them an avenue into EVERY market) or they must cut back and limit themselves to producing programming to be marketed to one of the various national syndicators (currently in an arrangement with 24 Clear Channel Communications stations).

What if AAR can't make it back? There is a possibility but hopefully a very miniscule one. However, if the network did fold, I don't think that liberals and progressives will do their best 'lemming' impressions and head off the nearest cliff. What Air America has done during its short existence is provide its listenership with the tools to go out and fight for the hearts and minds of independent-minded Americans. Time and time again, they have exposed the 'man behind the curtain' on important issues over the past 2-1/2 years (Iraq, Katrina, signing statements, current GOP scandals, etc.) and, in conjunction with other media outlets who have recently 'rediscovered' their spines, have led a full-flanked attack on individuals and a party that have hijacked our country's reputation and resources in the pursuit of an agenda favoring themselves.

I might be dating myself here, but the song for my graduating high school class was 'Freebird' by Lynyrd Skynyrd. In the lyrics, the question is asked: if I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me? In Air America's case, if the worst does happen, I can happily answer 'yes'...