[BC] Fairness doctrine by another name? aka censorship?

[Craig Bowman]

Donna,

I can sum my point up in two words.  Canadian Content.  It didn't work 
for the big 8 and it won't work for talk.  It is great if you happen to 
be Ann Murry, Gordon Lightfoot, etc. but not for any of the stations. 
Not one!  Mandating elements in a format will only dilute the product.  
Heck, there are programmers who try to hide the legal ID so nobody 
notices it.  This makes no more sense than mandating several country 
songs per hour on urban stations.  If it doesn't fit you shouldn't have 
to do it.  This is, after all, a business.

Craig Bowman

Donna Halper wrote:
> At 08:37 PM 2/16/2009, Craig wrote:
>> Donna,
>>
>> I have great respect for you and your experience but if more stations 
>> in a market carried the "other" side, the revenue potentially would 
>> be split very thing.  So thin that the stations might have to drop 
>> them..
>> If Ed does well against Sean, Bill, Gordon, etc. as the only 
>> alternative how will he do when there are three more alternatives.  
>> Air America did not do well and we can debate why but at the end of 
>> the day it was not popular.
>
> Ed and Stephanie are not syndicated by Air America and they have no 
> relationship to it, other than being syndicated on stations that carry 
> some Air America shows.  As a consultant, I believe that the best 
> talkers-- no matter what their politics-- will get an audience if 
> given a chance. And in a number of cities, Ed and Stephanie get an 
> audience, despite being on weaker signals.  I like to see various 
> views, various styles of talk, and various entertaining talkers get a 
> chance.  Limbaugh is entertaining and very good at what he does.  So 
> are Ed and Stephanie.  Talk radio is an art, and it's difficult to do 
> it well.  I want to the best talkers to be heard, no matter what their 
> ideologies.
>
>